#criminal appellate lawyer

[nealpinkstonlaw]

Neal isn't afraid of taking a case to trial. In fact, he spends most of his time fighting in the courtroom. 

Mail us at: mnealpinkston@gmail.com Just Dial: ​(423) 654 - 8326

[appealcounsil]

Civil Appeals in Chicago

Receive Aggressive Representation from a Civil Appeal Attorney

Mr. David Lewarchik is the leading civil appeal attorney in Chicago, IL, and the Michigan area, serving clients from diverse backgrounds with the best appellate legal advice available.

Civil appeals and the process by which appellate courts hear appeal cases is a challenging specialty in the legal profession, requiring unique knowledge and courtroom experience in order to secure favorable outcomes in those cases.

Lewarchik Law LLC and our talented civil appeal lawyer Mr. David Lewarchik has that experience, providing unrivaled appeals assistance to all clients. Lewarchik Law LLC has built a reputation on a foundation of courtesy, professionalism, and expertise in appellate law.

Mr. Lewarchik has given the firm the specialized skills to serve his appeal clients to the utmost

[appealcounsel]

Illinois Appeal Lawyer | Appeal Counsel

Searching for an experienced Illinois appeal lawyer? Appeal Counsel is your trusted partner for navigating the complexities of appellate law. Our dedicated team specializes in appeals across Illinois, offering expert guidance and representation to ensure your case is presented effectively. With a proven track record and deep understanding of appellate procedures, Appeal Counsel is committed to achieving the best possible outcomes for our clients. Trust us to be your advocate in the appellate courts of Illinois. For more details click https://www.appealcounsel.com/appellate-law/illinois-appeals

[dragoneyes618]

The Left in the West is also almost uniformly hostile to Jews and Judaism, and the further Left one is on the political spectrum the more intense is the antisemitism. In the United States, for example, the Socialist Workers Party argued that "the major task confronting American revolutionaries [as regards the Middle East] remains that of educating the radicalizing youth...for destruction of the state of Israel. In 1972, the party's paper, the Militant, criticized the Palestinian terrorists' murder of eleven Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics, but only on the grounds that it made "the criminal look like the victim." The Communist Party USA differed from the Socialist Workers Party in that it conceded Israel's right to exist. But typical of its view of Zionism is this statement in the party's journal by Hyman Lumer, the party's theoretician on the Middle East: "Zionism is...in its very essence a racist ideology. It sets the Jewish people apart as a special people, a 'chosen' people - if you will, a superior people. In Israel, the Zionist rulers have created a racist state."

Similar denunciations of Jewish nationalism were made by other Communist parties in the West. Individuals on the revolutionary Left were even more aggressive. Vanessa Redgrave, for example, the Academy Award-winning actress and a member of the Central Committee of the British Workers' Revolutionary Party (a Trotskyite Communist organization) made a propaganda film for the PLO in the late 1970s, at a time when the PLO was officially committed to Israel's destruction. In it, Redgrave performed a sensuous dance with a PLO machine gun. Under the guise of only attacking Zionists and Zionism (the film uses the Arabic word for Jew, Yahud, but the English subtitles speak of "Zionists"), the movie utilizes some classic Jew-hating images. In one scene Redgrave asks a young Arab girl, "What would you do if he [a Jewish soldier] tried to kill you?" Marie Syrkin, in a critique of the film, wrote: "At this point my mind wandered to the prioress of The Canterbury Tales who devoutly recounts a medieval tale of a Christian child murdered by the Jews. the killing of children: the hoariest of antisemitic libels."

The non-Communist far Left was similarly single-minded in its attacks on Israel and the Jews who identify with it. For example, during the 1970s the left-wing National Lawyers Guild sent a delegation to only one country in the world to examine human rights - Israel. The delegation met with PLO representatives, heard their story, and returned with a report denouncing Israel. A Jewish lawyer in the group wrote a dissenting report, but the National Lawyers Guild suppressed it.

At the Harvard Law School in 1979, leftist Third World students sponsored a conference on "Human Rights in the Third World." Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz reported that, "At that time, there were massacres in the Central African Republic, the blood of people killed by Idi Amin was still fresh in people's minds, and the atrocious record of Libya on human rights could well have been discussed. But only one item concerning human rights as placed on the agenda: 'The So-Called Nation of Israel's Terrorism and Genocide.'"

The title of the Harvard leftists' program on Israel exemplifies two characteristics of contemporary left-wing antisemitism: (1) the denial of Jewish nationhood, hence the appellation "the so-called nation of Israel," and (2) the constant accusation of genocide against the Jewish state. The charges are related in an Orwellian manner. The denial of Jewish nationhood legitimates all efforts at annihilating the Jewish state and Zionists, what may truly be called genocide. But this genocidal attempt against Israel is then inverted and projected from the enemies of Israel onto Israel itself.

Thus it is not coincidental that on one issue, the annihilation of Israel, the far Left, and neo-Nazis agree. On April 14, 1970, the New York Times reported that the radical Black power leader Stokely Carmichael declared, "I have never admired a White man, but the greatest of them, to my mind, was Hitler." In Chicago in October 1970, a speech by Israel's foreign minister, Abba Eban, was picketed by the far Left Youth Against War and Fascism and by the American Nazi Party.

Leftist antisemitism has also deeply infected left-wing Christians. Among Protestant groups, the World Council of Churches and affiliates such as teh (US) National Council of Churches were among the ajor advocates of recognizing the Palestine Liberation Organization, even though at the time the PLO was committed to the destruction of Israel and was the world's leading supporter of terrorism against Western democracies. Siilar support was offered by the American JFriends Services Committe, which represents American Quakers.

In 1976, the Christian Science Monitor was the only one of the fifty major newspapers in the United States to condemn Israel's raid on Entebbe, Uganda's main airport, where PLO terrorists were preparing to murder Jewish passengers on a hijacked plane.

The same situation holds for the Catholic Church, wherein Leftist theologians, clergy, and lay leaders with Third World Orientations have combined traditional church resentment of the "old Israel" with the Left's resentment of the new Israel. One such leader was Archbishop Hilarian Capucci, formerly of Jerusalem. On August 18, 1974, Israeli police caught Capucci, smuggling weapons and explosives for terrorists to kill Israeli civilians. Though Israel sentences him to twelve years in prison, it released him after fewer than three years at the personal request of Pope Paul VI.

Upon his release, Capuci declared, "Jesus Christ was the first fedayeen [Arab freedom fighter]. I am just following his example." A short time thereafter, he celebrated a Mass "in protest against the genocide perpetrated against the Arab people." A Catholic journal, Resumen, responded to Capucci's activities with a denunciation of his "propaganda pamphlets which revive the myths which make Capucci a Jesus and the Israelis deicidal mercenaries." In January 1979 Archbishop Capucci attended meetings in Damascus of the Palestine National Council, the supreme authority of the PLO, which had earlier made him an honorary member. Twenty-three years later, in 2002, Capucci repeatedly and publicly spoke up in favor of Palestinian suicide bombings directed against Israeli civilians.

Whereas in the past, Christian attitudes toward Jews were almost uniformly hostile, today such hostility emanates almost exclusively from Christianity's far Right and Left. On the other hand, moderate and conservative Christians in the United States are among the most aggressive supporters of Jewry and Israel's right to exist.

The Left has opposed Jews both for their religion and for their nationality. The Jewish fusion of religion and nationality is anathema to both the secularism and the universalism of the Left. This partially explains why the Left, though so hospitable and supportive of the national liberation movements of almost all other peoples, is so antagonistic to the nationalism of the Jews. It was regarding this Leftist hatred of the Jews that Social Democrat Irving Howe wrote, "In the warmest of hearts there is a cold spot for the Jews."

From Marx and the French socialists to to the Soviets, the Third World, and Western leftists today, an intense Jew-hatred has prevailed. As the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Antisemitism has become a unifying global ideology of the totalitarian Left." And many on the nontotalitarian Left have been compromised by their "no enemies on the Left" attitude. Thus a movement founded, established, and supported in large part by Jews has come to constitute, along with the Arab/Muslim world, the Jews' greatest enemy at this time.

- Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism, Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin, pages 133-136

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

New York Appellate Judge Stops Ridiculous New York Gag Order of President Trump - The Last Refuge

"Earlier today appellate judge David Friedman finally intervened in the insufferable gag order and put some common sense back into the case putting a stay on the lower court order.

NEW YORK (AP) — A gag order that barred Donald Trump from commenting about court personnel after he disparaged a law clerk in his New York civil fraud trial was temporarily lifted Thursday by an appellate judge who raised free speech concerns.

Judge David Friedman of the state’s intermediate appeals court issued what’s known a stay — suspending the gag order and allowing the former president to freely comment about court staff while a longer appeals process plays out.

The trial judge, Arthur Engoron, imposed the gag order on Oct. 3 after Trump made a false comment about the judge’s law clerk on social media. He later fined Trump $15,000 for violations and expanded it to his lawyers after they questioned the clerk’s prominent role in the trial.

Ruling at an emergency hearing Thursday, Friedman questioned Engoron’s authority to police Trump’s speech outside the courtroom — such as his frequent gripes about the case on social media and in comments to TV cameras in the courthouse hallway.

Friedman said that while it’s true that judges often issue gag orders, they’re mostly used in criminal cases where there’s a fear that comments about the case could influence the jury. Trump’s civil trial doesn’t have a jury.

Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said after Friedman ruled that the appellate judge “made the right decision and allowed President Trump to take full advantage of his constitutional First Amendment rights to talk about bias in his own trial, what he’s seeing and witnessing in his own trial — which, frankly, everyone needs to see.”

Another Trump attorney, Alina Habba, indicated she has no plans to advise the former president to stay quiet about the clerk. (read more)

The temporary pause in Engoron’s gag orders comes as a separate, more sweeping gag order on Trump in his criminal case in Washington, D.C. has also been lifted pending oral arguments before an appeals court scheduled for Monday.

Engoron's clerk is good friends with Chuck Schumer and DJT told the world about it on social media. How is that "false info?"

[actualrealnews]

One lawyer interviewing a former prosecutor re: Trump's RICO trial in Georgia, where the judge just threw to 2 charges.

Main takeaways:

Trump is still facing 8 felony counts on this trial

He is facing over 12 years in prison for each one

Kirshner, the bald dude on the right, believes this is a bad decision and the Georgia prosecutor (the plaintiff bringing the case) will appeal at the Georgia State Appellate court and have the 2 charges reinstated to Trump's criminal accusations.

I can't help but notice that Trump is getting away with less shit from official people (courts, state prosecutors, bailiffs) than he used to. What do you think?

[fenrislorsrai]

NOTE: in addition to dealing with systemic racism, this article also details a suicide. -

he focused his rage on one secret in particular: their handling of appeals sent to the court by prisoners who claimed they’d been unjustly convicted. Louisiana requires that a panel of three judges review all such petitions — known as pro se petitions, a Latin phrase that means “for oneself.” But Peterson wrote that the judges had instructed him to ignore the law and dispose of the appeals on his own. Defresne, he explained, signed off on the documents “without so much as a glance.” The implications were staggering. Over 12 years, the 5th Circuit, which is responsible for reviewing challenges from trial courts in four parishes, had disregarded at least 5,000 pro se petitions from Louisiana prisoners, according to the court’s records. The inmates ranged from people convicted of murder to nonviolent offenders sent away for life. Many had limited education and struggled to present their arguments in the language of the courts. If Peterson’s accusations were true, none of the judges had ever laid eyes on their claims.

-

-

There is overwhelming evidence that state courts routinely send innocent men and women to prison. Researchers estimate that at least 1% of those serving time for violent offenses have been wrongfully convicted — roughly 7,000 inmates in state prisons alone — though they believe that number is much higher. Louisiana law says that people sentenced to death are entitled to court-appointed lawyers for all of their appeals. Subjected to such scrutiny, an astounding number of the state’s prosecutions have fallen apart. Since 1976, 82% of Louisiana’s death sentences have been overturned by appeals judges after defense attorneys exposed serious violations that occurred at trial. Most sentences were reduced to life; some prisoners were exonerated. That statistic underscores a fundamental inequity. The people sentenced to lengthy or life sentences were arrested by the same police forces, prosecuted by the same district attorneys, represented by the same public defenders and convicted in the same courts as those on death row, but they are on their own. When they file a pro se petition asking Louisiana’s appellate courts to reconsider their cases, they are at a significant disadvantage. Those petitioning the 5th Circuit after that meeting in 1994 had no chance at all. To create the appearance of a proper review, former staffers said Dufresne formed a “pro se committee,” which included three judges who agreed to lend their names to Peterson’s rulings. Whenever a judge on the committee retired, Dufresne appointed someone new. The nature of the pro se committee was an open secret at the courthouse. “I knew what they were doing, and I knew it was unconstitutional,” said one former clerk. “Everyone knew about it.” In Louisiana, courts charge prisoners a fee for petitions — generally $50. Those costs are usually paid by parishes in which the defendants are convicted. By 1999, the 5th Circuit was charging $300. The money, paid by taxpayers, flowed into the 5th Circuit’s discretionary fund. In a period when the state’s criminal justice system was close to financial collapse, with some public defenders representing as many as 400 people at a time, records show that the 5th Circuit collected at least $1.7 million for the pro se petitions its judges did not read. Former 5th Circuit employees told me the judges spent the money on office furnishings, travel allowances — even for retired judges — and other perks the state didn’t cover. When asked about the fund’s expenditures, the 5th Circuit said it keeps financial records for only three years and could not provide an accounting.

THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT HAVE A HAPPY ENDING. JUSTICE IS NOT SERVED

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

That fact rose its ugly head yet again today when Judge Juan Merchan delayed sentencing Donald Trump in the New York hush money fraud case in which a jury found Trump guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records, several of which were related to his attempt to conceal the payment he made to Stormy Daniels before the presidential election in 2016. 

Reading Judge Merchan’s order is like being in a room with a middle-aged man on his first day in a yoga class, pain leaching from every corpuscle of his body as he contorts himself into making a decision he clearly believes not in the interest of either justice or the wellbeing of the country.  The order begins this way:

“By letter dated August 14, 2024, Defendant requests an adjournment of his sentencing, currently scheduled for September 18, 2024, until after the 2024 presidential election. He argues the adjournment is necessary to provide adequate time to ‘assess and pursue’ appellate options in the event this Court denies his pending Criminal Procedure Law ("CPL') S 330.30 motion and to avoid the potential ‘politically prejudicial’ impact that a public sentencing could have on him and his prospects in the upcoming election.  He attempts to bolster his application by repeating a litany of perceived and unsubstantiated grievances from previous filings that do not merit this Court’s attention and will not be addressed in this Decision.”

The judge’s quotes from Trump’s letter are proper given the nature of the order, but let me tell you, along with his dismissal of Trump’s “unsubstantiated grievances,” they are included to reflect the contempt Merchan has for Trump, his lawyers, and his request to delay sentencing. 

Take a step back for a moment.  This is the judge that Trump trashed every single day of the trial that concluded by finding him guilty on all counts.  He is the judge who found Trump in contempt of court ten times for various violations of gag orders imposed to prevent the defendant from harassing his clerk and employees and relatives of the prosecutors and other persons associated with the New York court system, including the judge’s own daughter.  The 10th time Merchan found Trump in contempt, after fining him $1,000, he threatened him with jail time.  Merchan had already fined Trump $9.000 for his previous violations.  Trump had attacked the judge’s daughter as “a rabid Trump hater,” among other slurs, and Merchan sanctioned him for that, as well as forbidding him from discussing any relatives of anyone associated with the case.  Trump had also attacked the make-up of the jury.  He made thinly veiled threats against witnesses in the case that Merchan warned Trump against but did not find contemptuous.

Defendants in criminal trials don’t do this stuff unless the defendant’s name is Donald Trump. 

In his order, Merchan cited the unprecedented nature of criminally sentencing a candidate for president: “This matter is one that stands alone, in a unique place in this Nation's history,” Merchan wrote.  He also included a statement of impartiality and purpose that you would not ordinarily find in such a judicial order:  “This adjournment request has now been decided in the same way this Court has decided every other issue that has arisen since the origination of this case, applying the facts and the law after carefully considering the issues and respective arguments of the parties to ensure that the integrity of the proceeding is protected, justice is served, and the independence of this judiciary kept firmly intact.”  The statement is, without citing instances of Trump’s continual disruption of his trial with lies, slander, and bluster, a defense of the integrity of the judicial process, which Merchan was caused to do almost daily during the trial.

All of this is unprecedented.  The nature of the crime is unprecedented:  a presidential candidate paying off a porn star to conceal a sexual affair from the voters; the defendant being a candidate for president during his trial; the contemptuous behavior of the defendant during the trial; the contempt of the defendant for the jury and the verdict; and of course, before the defendant was sentenced, the intervention of the Supreme Court that found Trump immune from prosecution for official acts taken while president, at least several of which – the signing of checks to Michael Cohen by Trump in the Oval Office – the defense will contend somehow fit the definition of “official acts.”

Trump wants the sentencing hearing postponed so that voters will not know whether he has been sentenced to jail for his crimes in New York.  That is unprecedented, too, just as was Trump not wanting voters in 2016 to know that he had paid hush-money to a porn star. 

Whether voters would take into consideration the judge’s sentence is almost irrelevant.  At this point, voters are faced daily with face-slaps of Trump’s misbehavior and madness, his jumble of unintelligible remarks and lies about childcare before the Economic Club of New York the other day being one of the most recent.  The Economic Club of New York includes among its membership people Trump wanted so badly to respect him when he was a real estate developer and citizen of Manhattan.  They are the uppermost crust of the upper crust of New York society and business – members of the clubs Trump wanted to belong to such as the Union League and Metropolitan Club and other mahogany-and-brass-fittings temples of the Manhattan elite.

And yet there he was, mumbling and lying and stumbling through a discussion any parent in America could speak about coherently: 

“But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about — that, because look, childcare is child care, couldn’t — you know, there’s something — you have to have it in this country. You have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers, compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to. But they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send products into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including childcare, that it’s going to take care. We’re going to have — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.”

The phrase, word-salad, is inadequate to describe what he said to that roomful of business executives and economic experts.  What could he have been thinking?

Well, he wasn’t thinking.  He was just flapping his jaws incomprehensibly, because that is what works for him out there among his MAGA faithful.  They don’t have childcare they can afford, and they don’t care that Trump has no plans to get it for them, because that is not what they want from him.  What they want is hate, of which he supplies copious quantities, which is not unprecedented in this country, and that in itself is a problem and has been since our founding as a nation.

Just as Judge Merchan had to take into consideration who the jury found guilty in his courtroom and upon whom he has to deliver sentence, I am afraid that the rest of us are saddled with a similar burden.  We have a monster in our midst.  We are trying to bar the monster from the White House as we did in 2020, but even if we succeed, he will not be gone, not in person, nor in the excretory politics he has encouraged among the citizenry. 

We are not a monstrous country, not yet anyway, but we have always had the tendency to become one.  We avoided such a fate only by Civil War once in our history.  We will find out in November if defeating Trump at the ballot box will enable us to go forward as a nation without resorting to violence. 

We can only vote, and hope.

Lucian Truscott Newsletter

[helpukiranagarwal]

विश्व अंतर्राष्ट्रीय न्याय दिवस 2023 | World Day for International Justice 2023 : Justice D K Arora

As we are well aware that the World Day for International Justice holds great significance in promoting awareness and support for international justice. It emphasizes the importance of accountability for grave crimes and highlights the role of the International Criminal Court in achieving justice and ending impunity.

By commemorating this day, we reaffirm our commitment to upholding human rights and the rule of law and ensuring that those responsible for atrocities are held accountable. It serves as a reminder of our collective responsibility to seek justice and promote a more just and peaceful world.

The theme of this year is “Overcoming Barriers & Unleashing Opportunities for Social Justice” which focuses on strengthening global solidarity and rebuild trust in governments.

To make people aware of the importance of social justice, we are sharing the views of Hon'ble Justice (Dr.) Shri Devendra Kumar Arora Ji, Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. We believe that Hon'ble Justice vast knowledge, experience, and expertise would greatly contribute, as well as inspire aspiring legal professionals and the general public at Large. It would not only shed light on the challenges and triumphs of Judiciary System of the whole world but also provide valuable insights and advice to all.

#JusticeDKArora #JusticeDevendraKumarArora

#internationaljusticeday #World_Day_for_International_Justice #अंतर्राष्ट्रीय_न्याय_दिवस #justice #law #equality #freedom #peace #lawyer #legal #humanrights #truth #lawyers #socialjustice #court #supremecourt #highcourt #uprera

#NarendraModi #pmoindia 

#HelpUTrust #HelpUEducationalandCharitableTrust

#KiranAgarwal #DrRupalAgarwal #HarshVardhanAgarwal

www.helputrust.org

@narendramodi @pmoindia

@HelpUEducationalAndCharitableTrust @HelpU.Trust

@KIRANHELPU

@HarshVardhanAgarwal.HVA @HVA.CLRS @HarshVardhanAgarwal.HelpUTrust

@HelpUTrustDrRupalAgarwal @RupalAgarwal.HELPU @drrupalagarwal

@HelpUTrustDrRupal

[appealcounsil]

Civil Appeals in Chicago

Receive Aggressive Representation from a Civil Appeal Attorney

Mr. David Lewarchik is the leading civil appeal attorney in Chicago, IL, and the Michigan area, serving clients from diverse backgrounds with the best appellate legal advice available.

Civil appeals and the process by which appellate courts hear appeal cases is a challenging specialty in the legal profession, requiring unique knowledge and courtroom experience in order to secure favorable outcomes in those cases.

Lewarchik Law LLC and our talented civil appeal lawyer Mr. David Lewarchik has that experience, providing unrivaled appeals assistance to all clients. Lewarchik Law LLC has built a reputation on a foundation of courtesy, professionalism, and expertise in appellate law.

Mr. Lewarchik has given the firm the specialized skills to serve his appeal clients to the utmost.

[appealcounsel]

Post Conviction Lawyers | Appeal Counsel

Need experienced post conviction lawyers? Our skilled appeal counsel specializes in post conviction relief, ensuring your rights are upheld. With a deep understanding of the appellate system, our team provides comprehensive legal representation to challenge wrongful convictions and unfair sentences. Trust our post conviction lawyers to fight tirelessly for justice and achieve the best possible outcomes in your case. Contact us today to learn how our dedicated appeal counsel can make a difference for you. For more details click https://www.appealcounsel.com/appellate-law/post-conviction-relief

[ceterisparibus116]

hello!! so i know there is not much extra time to be had in law school, so i was wondering: in your opinion, do you think doing moot court is worth it?

Ooh yes! YES.

Okay. To actually add some nuance to the discussion. Law school is very busy, but not all demands on your time are equal. Preparing for exams (whatever that may look like for the individual) is obviously important, but if you show up for an interview with A's in all your classes and nothing more...well, that's not going to look great. To be a competitive candidate, you need extracurriculars.

Of the possible extracurriculars out there, moot court (by which I assume you mean appellate advocacy) is one of the fanciest. If you're going for civil law, moot court will definitely make you stand out.

If you're going for criminal law...well, most criminal law firms and offices are more interested in mock trial (or trial team, or whatever the school may call the competition that puts on a fake trial).

The difference is that very few lawyers will actually argue appeals, so the value of appellate advocacy is simply in oral arguments. When do you need to give oral arguments? Any time a contested motion is set for a hearing. That happens all the time in civil law, compared with trials, which happen rarely in civil law. In criminal law, by context, far more cases go to trial, and there are relatively fewer motions set for a hearing.

But both moot court and mock trial are far more practical than doing, say, law journal, which gives you no real advocacy experience.

What if you have to decide between, say, moot court and an internship? Or between moot court and working with a clinic? That will depend way more on your individual goals, and on what the firms/offices you hope to work for one day are looking for. If you have an idea of what you want to do, I highly recommend reaching out to firms and offices that do that kind of work and asking what they would prefer to see in a candidate. (Plus, that gets you on their radar - and that's always a good thing!)

Does that help?

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Ivanka Trump has wriggled her way out of a court order appointing a special monitor to oversee the finances of the Trump Organization and individuals connected to the company, according to The Daily Beast.

The agreement allows Ivanka Trump to keep her own business interests away from the gaze of a retired federal judge who is tasked with keeping an eye on the Trump Organization's transactions to ensure it doesn't commit any more alleged fraud.

The company was barred from transferring or disposing of material without giving advance notice to the court and New York Attorney General Letitia James' office after James sounded the alarm over a Trump scheme to form a "Trump Organization II" after she filed a $250 million fraud lawsuit against the Trump family and company.

A jury in Manhattan on Tuesday found two entities controlled by former President Donald Trump guilty of 17 counts of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records. The Trump Corp. and Trump Payroll Corp. were found guilty of all charges brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

James in the August lawsuit alleged that Trump and his three eldest children were involved in a decade-long fraud scheme. She is seeking to permanently bar them from serving as an officer or director of a company in New York state.

Justice Arthur Engoron placed the company under court supervision to scrutinize major transactions and ensure the Trump Organization would not shift assets to stash cash away from law enforcement.

In the midst of this, Ivanka Trump's lawyers wrote to the judge last month requesting a special exemption, arguing that she hasn't held an official role at the Trump Organization since serving as a White House aide during her father's presidential administration, The Daily Beast's Jose Pagliery reported.

Her lawyers made similar arguments in the state's appellate court, a source told the outlet. She even went as far as retaining her own lawyers and filing an appeal that was separate from the rest of the family.

​​"Ms. Trump has had no involvement for more than five years… Ms. Trump has had no role as an officer, director, or employee of the Trump Organization or any of its affiliates since at least January 2017," her lawyers said in an appeal filed Nov. 7.

But the eldest daughter of the former President was "a key player in many of the transactions" under investigation, especially because of her involvement in cutting deals that relied on falsified documents, according to court papers in the Attorney General's office.

NY AG lawyers also found that she is "responsible for securing loan terms" from Deutsche Bank relying on fake property valuations for the company's golf course in Doral, Florida. Investigators also claim she "played similar roles" in obtaining money for the company's projects in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

Pagliery tweeted on Wednesday that the latest filings show that Ivanka Trump "keeps distancing herself from her father's legacy of shame."

Ivanka Trump started distancing herself from her father's legacy soon after he incited violence at the Capitol and attempted to overthrow the 2020 presidential election.

She later testified before the House Jan. 6 Committee and said she "accepted" Attorney General Bill Barr's "perspective about the election" not being fraudulent.

More recently, she has kept a low profile, refusing to show up to her father's announcement of his 2024 presidential campaign. She has stated that she does not intend to reenter political life.

[beardedmrbean]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday revived claims by a Texas inmate who has the rare support of the state prosecutor's office that put him on death row.

The justices threw out a Texas appeals court ruling that refused to grant the inmate, Areli Escobar, a new trial. The state appeals court had overruled a lower court judge who documented the flaws in the forensic evidence used to convict Escobar.

The high court's action returns the case to the appeals court.

Escobar was convicted and sentenced to death in the May 2009 fatal stabbing and sexual assault of Bianca Maldonado, a 17-year-old high school student in Austin. They lived in the same apartment complex.

The focus of the prosecution case against Escobar was evidence from the Austin Police Department's DNA lab.

But a later audit turned up problems at the lab that led Judge David Wahlberg of the Travis County District Court to conclude that Escobar's trial was unfair.

“The State’s use of unreliable, false, or misleading DNA evidence to secure (Escobar's) conviction violated fundamental concepts of justice,” Wahlberg wrote.

When the case returned to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Travis County prosecutors no longer were defending the conviction. Voters had elected a new district attorney, Jose Garza, who ran on a promise to hold police accountable in Austin, the state capital and county seat.

But the appeals court refused to go along, saying it had conducted its own review that justified affirming the conviction and sentence, and not mentioning the prosecution's change of position. Even after Garza's office pointed out it was no longer standing behind the conviction, the appeals court stuck with its ruling.

In its filing with the Supreme Court, Garza's office wrote that prosecutors have a duty to see justice done and that the appeals court “undermined the District Attorney’s historical role in the criminal justice system.”

Escobar's lawyers, unsurprisingly, agreed, telling the court that their case is so clear, the justices could reverse the appellate ruling without hearing arguments.

“If ever there were a case calling for summary reversal, it is this capital case. Denying the petition would be a grave miscarriage of justice,” they wrote.

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

President Trump Special Counsel “Election Interference Case” in DC Suspended Indefinitely

February 2, 2024

In the ridiculous federal election interference case in D.C., President Trump’s attorneys argued to the DC Circuit appellate court that President Trump holds inherent constitutional immunity. In essence, because President Trump was acquitted by the Senate of claims he incited or instigated the January 6, 2021, events, lawyers arguing under the constitution that only impeached and removed presidents can be criminally prosecuted.

From the Comments:

The initial 3-judge panel of the court has taken up the appeal, and all subsequent lower court activity was suspended until the constitutional issue is resolved. Again, if President Trump does not have immunity, then all preceding and future presidents can be criminally prosecuted for any/all events and decisions while holding office. This is a core issue, and the DC Circuit Court of Appeals has to tread very carefully with these ramifications at the forefront.

The decision of the 3-judge panel could also be followed by a full en-banc review by all judges in the circuit. Then, depending on their decision, it could -likely will- go even higher to the U.S. Supreme Court. All of this takes time, and the initial 3-judge appeals court have not provided any hints on their timeline.

Apparently, as a consequence, the entire trial of the case has been removed from the lower DC court docket. The removal took place within the last few days, and the Washington Post noticed the removal. This removal means the timing of the case, if at all, is completely unknown now.

WASHINGTON – Former president Donald Trump’s March 4 trial date on charges of plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election has been dropped from the public calendar of the federal court in Washington, a sign of what has long been anticipated — that his claim of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution would delay his trial while it remains on appeal.

The change did not appear on the official criminal case docket before U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, who has made clear since Trump filed his appeal on Dec. 7 that all trial deadlines would be suspended while he challenges the case. On appeal, Trump is arguing that the government does not have authority under the Constitution to bring charges against him for actions he took while president after the 2020 election through the Jan. 6, 2021. (read more)

In addition to the challenges within these core issues, the Lawfare approach by Jack Smith, Mary McCord and Andrew Weissmann, faces multiple additional hurdles.  These are all issues that surface when Lawfare, the application of twisted legal theory intended to manipulate public opinion, runs into the reality of ever-increasing scrutiny from courts.

Combine these fraudulent legal theories with the reality that President Trump’s status is almost certainly “presumptive presidential nominee” in the eyes of the entire judicial branch, and things change.  The pretending justification for the Lawfare claims now hit the non-pretending and visible reality of political intent.

The judicial scrutiny gets even more focused, and the explanations demanded as justifications to target President Trump increase.  As the calendar of the November election gets closer Jack, Mary and Andrew will have to rely on ideologically aligned black robes to maintain their Lawfare pretense.  Some of the robes will not be comfortable with the demands of Jack, Mary and Andrew.

Some of the robes may not pretend, and that poses a problem for Jack, Mary and Andrew.

[danielbrownlaw]

Daniel Brown – Lead Counsel

Learn more about our legal team.

Daniel Brown’s practice is directed to the defence of individual and corporate clients in criminal and regulatory litigation. He has extensive experience successfully conducting criminal and quasi-criminal trials, regulatory and professional discipline hearings, appeals, advisory work, and witness representation.

A graduate of Queen’s University Law School, Daniel commenced practicing criminal law more than twenty years ago at Pinkofskys LLP ‐ Canada’s largest criminal defence firm. He opened Daniel Brown Law in 2008.

Daniel is among an elite group of defence lawyers certified as criminal law specialists by the Law Society of Ontario, the governing body of Ontario lawyers. This certification guarantees that the recipient is, “recognized and experienced in his or her field of law and who has met high standards”.

Daniel is a seasoned and highly skilled criminal defence lawyer. With offices located in close proximity to several key courthouses in downtown Toronto and York Region, he routinely represents clients charged with everything from domestic assault and drug possession, to impaired driving, sexual assault and murder.

Daniel has appeared at all levels of court in the Province of Ontario, including as trial counsel in the Ontario Court of Justice and  Superior Court of Justice and as appellate counsel at the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the Supreme Court of Canada.

Daniel is recognized by Post City Magazine as one of Toronto’s Top Criminal Lawyers and his firm has been repeatedly recognized as one of Canada’s Top Criminal Law Boutiques by Canadian Lawyer Magazine. Daniel has also been selected by his peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers in Canada for his work in Criminal Defence.

Much of Daniel’s legal practice is focused on representing people who are strangers to the justice system. His individual clients are professionals, public figures, first responders, and persons for whom a criminal or regulatory investigation, prosecution or conviction may jeopardize their employment, professional and personal reputations, and ability to travel.

Read more about Daniel Brown by clicking the source in this post.

Contact us today

Toronto 103 Church St. #400 Toronto ON M5C 2G3 Tel: (416) 297-7200 Toll Free: 1 (866) 243-6161 Vaughan 301-8800 Dufferin St. Vaughan ON L4K 0C5