Judge Sonia Sotomayor Denied My Appeal and I Spent 16 Years in Prison For a Crime I Didn't Commit

What do we really know about Sotomayor?

Could be another classic " the right hate her so she can't be too bad." or "We need another woman and she's Hispanic too!"

Well ... we needed another black ... and we got Clarence Thomas ...

Let me tell you, anyone getting so much adulation from this Congress can't be all that good either ...

What do progressives really know about Sotomayor?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It sounds like your beef is with the original trial judge (and jury?)and the apellate court; by the time your case got to Sotomayor, you'd lost several times, and with no NEW evidence to convince her that the previous judges were wrong, she was not likely to reverse them on a whim, no matter how innocent YOU knew you were. Maybe your lawyer sucked; maybe your civil rights were violated, probably, the cops were slimeballs, and maybe the legal system is AFU and needs major changes. But to focus on Sotomayor, who DID NOT sentence you, just because she's up for the SCOTUS job, is sure looking like you wanting to extract a payback to me, under the pretense of judicial watchdogging. If she is asked about your case, and she says she examined the evidence, and stands by it, then she's merely guilty of having made a mistake in the judgement of your sterling character. Unfortunately, that's not how the job works. Maybe if she HAD MET you, and maybe spent the afternoon with you, she'd have KNOWN, (because Puerto Ricans are all psychics, right?) that you were innocent. That she's not King Solomon is not a good enough reason to go after her or prevent her from getting the Court seat. But, also, if I'd lost 16 years of MY life, I'd be bitter as hell, too. I'd be PISSED!! Good luck getting over it...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

surely the writer has had a chance to discuss his case with his fellow inmates. they must have informed him by now that people without means often have lousy attorneys. this complaintant had one. not knowing how to file papers?

dont mistake me. judge sonia is mediocre for a host of reasons; her hasty superficial overturned firefighter opinion being the worst example. she is real good at ruining lives.


however, she is going on the high court and she won't be the first mediocrity there. look at who she is replacing and look objectively at Thurgood Marshall, a lousy bigoted Justice even if a very good trial lawyer.

she will have the distinction of being the the first Latino mediocrity on the Court. sort of like obama's being the first mulatto mediocrity in the white house. Harvard doesn't give you a brain just because you provide Harvard with a little "diversity".

But this sad guy, if he is real, and isn't a political plant, has dug his own grave. He won't be testifying anywhere soon unless he eventually qualfies for parole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

has any legal system in any country of our world been about justice?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The writer's personal tragedy will be familiar to anyone living in the UK.

Forced confession? Tick. Lousy lawyer? Tick. Biased jury? Tick. Bad advice from the court? Tick. Appeal process dealing only with points of law? Tick.

And yet most criminals running corporations go unpunished. As do their enablers, the majority of politicians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look up Thomas Sowell creators syndicate good read.
He says, what I dare not too for you will label me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The fact that she is a woman of Hispanic descent is thought by some to make her an appealing choice for ethic communities and women. This becomes relevant to Obama's decision-making process since a number of organizations in the Hispanic community are demanding a Hispanic Supreme Court justice partly because during the 2008 election, Barack Obama's victory was assisted by strong support from the Hispanic community.
The belief that she will be perceived as a centrist in her judicial philosophy. Mark Tushnet, the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Harvard Law School says, "Because Sotomayor has a reputation for staying behind the scenes and sits on a federal bench known for its centrism, it's likely that she would be able to garner a two-thirds majority in the Senate, even if the Democrats only control an estimated 55 or so seats. Plus there's an insurance measure if the nomination gets too politicized publicly.''
It is thought that it might be tactically difficult for Republicans to oppose a Sotomayor nomination because she was originally appointed to the federal bench by Republican George H.W. Bush. "If you're a Democratic strategist, you can gin up ads that say, 'She was good enough for George H. W. Bush.
Jeffrey Rosen of The New Republic interviewed people he described as "a range of people who have worked with her" that he describes as primarily "former law clerks for other judges on the Second Circuit or former federal prosecutors in New York" and Democrats who all "want President Obama to appoint a judicial star of the highest intellectual caliber who has the potential to change the direction of the court." Based on these interviews, Rosen published a piece on May 4, 2009 where he maintains that these interviewees "expressed questions about [Sotomayor's] temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative."
With regard to the issue of judicial temperament, Rosen says that the people he interviewed "consistently" were of the mind that Sotomayor is "not that smart" and is "kind of a bully on the bench."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It starts with cops selecting a patsy to be treated as guilty, and from then on the drive is to get the person placed in gaol and kept there, not to get at the truth. This is a co-operative effort of cops, prosecutors and judiciary all directed to the same end. It includes Judge Sotomayor in this instance. Evidence directed to "getting a result" is cherry-picked or just plain invented, alternative evidence is ignored or even suppressed. When a convicted person is actually innocent, this is wrongly termed "miscarriage of justice". But with every state participant in the system who seeks not truth but conviction the proper term is "perversion of the course of justice" which if the ordinary plebs commit it is treated as a criminal offence.

Australia became notorious nearly 30 years ago for the wrongful conviction by a jury of Northern Territory ignoramuses of Mrs Lindy Chamberlain [1] on a trumped up charge of murdering her daughter - hinging on a patently improbable scene and on perjured forensic evidence (e.g. swearing that a sound-deadening paint in her car was "foetal blood"). Years later the conviction was overturned and the unfortunate mother released from gaol. But the cops and legal careerists right up to the High Court left heel marks resisting calls for review. Same with several false convictions, later overturned after many years, in Western Australia where I live.

Part of the answer, to concentrate the minds of law-enforcement personnel - from the beat cop to the highest judge - on integrity, is to institute stiff penalties for perversion of the course of justice as you or I would cop if we did it. Proving an innocent person guilty requires assiduous effort and no naysayers caring about truth. When it happens, a system based on rule of justice rather than the too-convenient rule of law would identify and punish those who should have cared and didn’t. Innocence should always cap procedure and not the other way around. At the very least, those who invent evidence and suppress contrary evidence should be outed by name on a permanent web page - starting with those who railroaded Jeffrey Deskovic. And the Senators should roast Judge Sotomayor over it.

[1] http://www.law.umkc.edu/
faculty/projects/FTrials/
chamberlain/chamberlainaccount.html,
"Cry in the Dark", movie starring Meryl Streep and Sam Neill which Mrs Chamberlain described as accurate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you really want to be heard, follow these steps:
1. Incorporate
2. Hire a team of lobbyists
3. File for TARP funds
4. Pay yourself a huge bonus
5. Relax and take a hike on the Appalachian Trail

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

JEFFREY DESKOVIC SPEAKS ABOUT JUDGE SOTOMAYOR

Judge Sotomayor's "Prosecutorial misconduct and her procedure over innocence."

Please share this video with as many people as you can, as they will be concerned about it as you. This is probably one of the most important thing you can do to make a difference in this corrupt society that we live in today. Consider being held as a hostage for 16 1/2 years in your own country, the most hideous crime in America is political corruption. This is "Jeffrey Deskovic Speaks" and it's the first segment of his talk show. I am truly honored to be part of it.

(WATCH THE 3 MIN. YOU TUBE VIDEO) “Embed it onto your websites”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2-NgsTLjfA

Thank you for watching!

Jeffrey Deskovic

Barbara Ricci


The Westchester News
http://thewestchesternews.com
914 237-8631

Westchester County, New York

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jeff
I read your article with a great deal of interest and sympathy. It's shocking I am sure to many prisoners when their habeas petitions are procedurally dismissed. Such dismissals, for various reasons, are the rule rather than the exception in Section 2254 litigation. I know because I have served as a judicial attorney in the federal courts, appellate and district, for over 20 years now. I have written literally hundreds of such orders dismissing habeas corpus petitions as being untimely filed outside the AEDPA 1-year statute of limitations of 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1). It is not at all uncommon and I can assure you that had your petition come before 100 other judges on appeal, the result would have been the same 99 times out of 100. In other words, it was not a reflection of any particular quality of the Judge, or lack of compassion, that the dismissal of your petition was affirmed on appeal. The exceptions to the 1-year statute of limitations are so narrow and so infrequently applied that the result in your case, while unfortunate, was predictable. Good Luck to you, Jeff, I hope that you do well on the outside. You definitely got a bum rap, but it wasn't because of Judge Sotomayer. I can assure you of that fact with a great deal of confidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm afraid a lot of us whom are predicting a forward-looking Progressive will ultimately be bitterly disappointed in Judge Sonya.

The Right Wing might end up being pleasantly surprised.

The Implosion Continues

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Certainly anyone reading this article can feel the authors pain and frustration. It is truly overwhelming in the sense of how we treat ourselves in this country. Not just criminal (in)justice but public schools, actually, all public programs have sometimes fatal flaws which devastate peoples lives every day. I personally have a felony conviction which was unjust and I can rise up onto the soap box in a flash but I also realize that the issues are much, much bigger than just my 'drop in the bucket'. It is cumulative as is evidenced by the staggering numbers of people currently incarcerated and/or on 'supervision' of some sort in Amerika. Anymore in this country it seems that this is the land of the indentured and the home of the broken, none of us is as free or as brave as was intended. To say that it is worrisome is an understatement. I have to exercise great self control to stop myself from packing what i perceive to be important and running to the nearest cave, or encampment, till such time as it is 'over'. I am not so sure that our society will ever recover from this current 'downturn' and the children won't ever be able to appreciate the freedom that so many veterans have sacrificed their lives for over the years.

This time is 1984, Soylent Green, Bladerunner and Mad Max all in one and we have only two choices as I see it. Rise up and force change, or hunker down, cope and wait it out.

I would like to be proven wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sotomayor was a zealous prosecutor according to her colleagues.

Prosecutors are all about racking up high conviction rates to pad their political resumes. As a result DA's make lousy jurists. They have long since lost any perspective is justice or the rule of law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

most Americans still don't get it. Your 'respect for authority' is a big part of your problems. The Supreme Court is supreme in name only. Their decisions are often flawed because they are a group of biased rich individuals. Americans often treat each other like crap. Compassion and empathy are often missing here as well as in the needless wars in which America killed millions of innocent people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well if that's the case, she ought to sail thru the nomination process rather quickly with the Rethugs. They love procedure at all costs and they certainly couldn't care less about "empathy".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in her own career than in serving justice. That she would just rubber-stamp deny a crucial case like yours rather than review it only bears this out. She has apparently played the "Hispanic card" to get as far as she has with very dubious talent.

I suggest you demand a written apology, explanation, & vindication from Sotomayar, for starters!

Good luck!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

then she'll be qualified without further delay. Obama was never expected to pick a justice any more liberal than Souter. However, who knows what Sotomayor will turn out to be. Expect the worst.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keep in mind that the S Court ruled, even before Alito and Roberts joined, that an INNOCENT person -- even one that everybody KNOWS is innocent -- CAN still be put to death if he has run out of appeals. (The particulars of the case escape me. But the man wrongly accused of killing someone was from Tex-ass, of course. The case occurred during the Clinton years, I think. And yes, the innocent inmate has already been put to death. There was no possible way that he could have committed the murder. Even the prosecutor said he was innocent. Too bad.)

Sotomayor, I guess, will fit right in on the Supreme Court.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is enough for me. Send her packing!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

....Should like her then.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am all for your plight Jeffry. It is plain sight to see that Sotomayor is unstable. When Obama was appointing Sotomayor, she kept on saying she owed her complete success to her Mother & never once mentioned her Father. I began to wonder if her father ever existed in her eyes & with the religious feminist lobby group that Obama uses, she had no problems getting the job. I admit that I was in support of her appointment at first but as the sentiment came clearer, my support receded.
I do not believe in the death penalty for the very reason that you are fighting this fight for justice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It would be better if this article provided a legal citation to the various Deskovic cases. I may be paranoid, but I would be much more supportive of Deskovic if such a citation were included here.

While I'm a little wary of supporting Sotomayor, the idea that Sotomayor is not an intellectual is laughable. She graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University. You can raise doubts about the actual meaning of the ivy league or such honors, but when someone achieves those traditional markers of success it is absurd to suggest she might have done it even without any intellectual abilities.

Her decision regarding the New Haven Firefighters was the right decision and adheres closely to the Constitution. The four treasonous justices of the Supreme Court managed to coax a fifth justice to overturn the decision, but that doesn’t do anything to undermine her role on the appellate court.

Of greater concern – along with this Deskovic case – is the decision to uphold the gag rule of the Bush administration which grants a power to the presidency (the ability to pass a law abridging the freedom of speech) that the Constitution explicitly implicitly denied to the executive and a power to make laws explicitly denied to the Congress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... or she would never have been nominated.

Instead of anything substantive about her record, we hear advertising about her "empathy." This is coming to seem typical of the Obama administration: appoint nothing but political and/or corporate tools, spout a few nice-sounding words, and admonish the public to put up or shut up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There's something phoney about a permanent non-stop smile. It's usually hiding something. Nobody can be that happy all the time. Her personal story is impressive and nothiing was ever handed to her. But the reality is that we can't have "etched in stone" thinkers on the court. Times change, and it's important to be able to adjust to the fact that the country in ten years will be a different kind of place. Can she move with the times and still be an effective judge. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Supreme Court has already ruled that actual innocence is no grounds for appeal in death penalty cases!

Procedure is king in our courts. Justice and guilt or innocence is the least relevant part of the process.

Why is this?

I would say that it is to insure that the guilty rich (who are rarely arrested in the first place) can usually escape (unless there is too much publicity - as in the Madoff case) the consequences of their actions without too much fuss - while conviction rates are kept unbelievably high (95% of cases are plea-bargained guilty and of the few that go to trial, conviction rates are 95% or more) by the masses of the poor, who are easily railroaded, guilty or not.

I have said it many times before: Once charged, I would much rather be rich and guilty than poor and innocent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'll tell you what you really want ... treatment from the judicial system that acknowledges you as an individual, and offers you privileges nobody else has.

It is truly awful that you were wrongly imprisoned for a multitude of reasons. You have my sympathy.

However to demand that the huge system that is the US judicial system make an exception for your lawyer with regard to the filing of your habeas petition is simply unreasonable, and unrealistic. If you get it, what is the point of having deadlines in the first place?

It's like bitching because the cop that gave you the speeding ticket didn't wave you on because you have a cool car. In his world, you were speeding, just like the rest of the speeders, and he can't possibly be the arbiter of 'cool car' waivers.

The US judicial system deals with hundreds of thousands of cases each year, and yours was only one of them. To give you a break because your lawyer and his office were too incompetent to get the actual filing date correct would be to open the door to every lawyer who slept at the switch.

Your sour grapes reflect your frustration, however your post-conviction case was handled just as those of hundreds of thousands of others are handled ... based on established, blind procedure, put in place to keep the system functioning and impartial. Nobody has ever claimed the system is perfect, and you experienced one of its imperfections when you were unconscionably, wrongly imprisoned.

Please do not ever write an article about your wishes for the judicial system to treat every individual case as the individual wishes it were treated, because you would be advocating for a complete abandonment of any sort of justice, and for a system that rewards those who have resources most do not. Justice for all, or justice for none. In your case, justice was served, however you were not the beneficiary. (And, of course, I mean that while you were unjustly railroaded into your conviction, the just handling of your appeal by the court on which Sotomayor sat was book-perfect.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow, truly an amazing story. The US Kangaroo court system is a JOKE. Its a money making machine and thats all that matters. MONEY!

Jess
Is your ISP watching?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If he's got a quarrel with anybody, it's his lawyer, who I'm assuming was not appearing before the NY Bar for the first time. The supposed exonerating evidence wasn't presented in time, and the crybaby defense ("But the court clerk SAAAAAAIIIIIID!! She SAAAAAIIIIIIID!!) is, shall we say, rarely acceptable.

But maybe we should go a bit easier on the lawyer, as from the party's language ("I then filed this Writ and blahblah....") I suspect he was acting for himself at least part of the time.

Judge Sotomayor didn't sentence this guy. His jury or the judge presiding over his original trial did that. It was her job as a Federal judge to rule on the points of law before her, and that's exactly what she did. It was the complainant's job, and his attorney's in his stead, to meet the court's standards for consideration, and that's exactly what they didn't.

You snooze, you lose. No show is no go. That's the court system. Maybe there are exceptions sometimes. This dude didn't get one. Boo Hoo.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This case of course reflects poorly on sotomaORR. She has that same incompetent look as pelosi, so it is no surprise.

Rather than show a little compassion when the guy's life and freedom is on the line, she mailed it in and hid behind procedure. Most likely she was more worried about those $600 shoes that she wanted, and the turkey salad at Eldon's for lunch than this guy's freedom, rights, or seeing actual justice administered.

So she is incompetent, but the dems like her and will make excuses for her anyway, because she has a D behind her name, tits, and less than alabaster skin. So did Lassie, except Lassie was a little sharper, and would have actually helped the guy.

There really is a bigger problem being demonstrated here though. Our justice system has morphed from determining innocence and guilt into a bunch of procedural maneuverings by rich arrogant assholes. This is just a good example of judges denying justice on procedure rather than merit. I too have been there, and on the wrong end.

What harm could have come from letting this guy have a day or two on the filing, especially when there was irrefutable evidence only a bureaucratic step away? The judges are too worried about golf, the country club, or the fancy purse at N&M to actually look into the case. They read the summary, looked at each other and said, "Fuck him, I'm busy", and went to collect their big check.

If irrefutable evidence isn't enough to get past procedural bullshit, what is?

Every single one of these judges should be reviewed and fired, and then put into jail for their arrogance driven injustices, year for year. The SOL law should be repealed, and reform of our justice system should be undertaken to make justice a principal instead of an Orwellian oxymoron.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'd like to point out that SCOTUS has 9 count-em 9 judges. Why is everybody so down on Sotomayor? She is more qualified, at this time than any of the other judges were when they were appointed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

....you are guilty of being White with a second count of being male.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Your attorney was aware of the deadline well before it expired, or should have been. Deadlines are big part of how justice is gamed here, and observing those deadlines is as much part of your defense as the actual appeal itself

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

just like clarence thomas...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jeff,
Whenever I read of wrongful convictions, my blood boils. My brother's life was ruined as well, and I have spent a good deal of my life standing in the corner of the wrongfully convicted, hoping to help turn deaf ears in their direction. All these comments you read here -- about how it's the original judge's fault, or that procedure matters, or that your attorney is at fault -- NONE OF THIS is as important as ultimate justice in our courts. I see your case as just another one of the failures in a system where the state's attorneys, from the lowly DA to the Attorneys General, are allowed to win criminal trials at any cost to the innocent accused. It sickens me that so many innocent people are forgotten, just thrown away, and that the clock of justice ticks by so slowly for those who desperately await someone, something, anything to end their nightmare. Count on me to put some pressure on our Congress to put Sotomayor in the hotseat, and thank you for bringing this to the attention of all Americans. So many of us are so eager for Obama to break the deadlock in the Supreme Court that we'll take anyone at this point; it's a damned good thing you pointed out that Judge Sotomayor is no saint. I would never have known. She needs to be held accountable. Good luck to you, and thank you for speaking truth to power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One point I did not hear from this victim is how he finally did get exonerated. I suggest he pursue a discussion that elaborates methods of fighting wrongful convictions, for the benefit of other victims, rather than this lost cause of trying to prevent another judge from being promoted. In order to have balance on the bench of any court shouldn't there be appointees from the defensive side of justice? Are there any justices in any of our courts that came from the ranks of defense lawyers? Not that I know of. All of the appointed justices have come from the ranks of prosecutors. And let's face it, since the prison systems have been privatized (free market)the jails and prisons must be filled to capacity in order to maximize profits. Justice in America is, sadly, totally laughable. While the politicians and their supporters are completely above the law, the rest of us get only the justice we can afford. The courts are grist mills churning out the fodder required for its' own justification. Law enforcement agencies that continue to break the law in order to uphold it is the epitome of lawlessness and insanity. But now Sotomayer is just the next puppet to occupy the kangaroo court of corporate America. Pull her strings and watch her dance lockstep with Alito and Roberts and the rest of the show. The fact she was first appointed by George Bush says it all. Why Obama is even considering her reveals the fact that he is just another republican in sheeps clothing. A very apt phrase because that is just what the dems behave like, sheep. The republicans have trashed our economy, our morals, our language, and our enviroment. Although you suffered personally from the perverted procedures of affluent justice you must rise above it and direct your energies into real change, the destruction of the corporate state. Don't let the right victimize you again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One point I did not hear from this victim is how he finally did get exonerated. I suggest he pursue a discussion that elaborates methods of fighting wrongful convictions, for the benefit of other victims, rather than this lost cause of trying to prevent another judge from being promoted. In order to have balance on the bench of any court shouldn't there be appointees from the defensive side of justice? Are there any justices in any of our courts that came from the ranks of defense lawyers? Not that I know of. All of the appointed justices have come from the ranks of prosecutors. And let's face it, since the prison systems have been privatized (free market)the jails and prisons must be filled to capacity in order to maximize profits. Justice in America is, sadly, totally laughable. While the politicians and their supporters are completely above the law, the rest of us get only the justice we can afford. The courts are grist mills churning out the fodder required for its' own justification. Law enforcement agencies that continue to break the law in order to uphold it is the epitome of lawlessness and insanity. But now Sotomayer is just the next puppet to occupy the kangaroo court of corporate America. Pull her strings and watch her dance lockstep with Alito and Roberts and the rest of the show. The fact she was first appointed by George Bush says it all. Why Obama is even considering her reveals the fact that he is just another republican in sheeps clothing. A very apt phrase because that is just what the dems behave like, sheep. The republicans have trashed our economy, our morals, our language, and our enviroment. Although you suffered personally from the perverted procedures of affluent justice you must rise above it and direct your energies into real change, the destruction of the corporate state. Don't let the right victimize you again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't feel too bad. I lost all my benefits because of a San Diego Federal judge that couldn't tell the difference between paddling and surfing, it would have taken her a a complete 15 minutes to see, but she wouldn't take the time, still can't work! The document itself was also fraudulent.

Don't blame stuff on the president, he/she is just a figurehead. Congress is screwing us. Sometimes I wish anyone who has been in there over 10 years should be flushed and all benefits canceled and let them find a real job.

Since Palin can see Russia from her home, she probably knows more about them than the rest of our government.

Repeal the 17 amendment from the bill of rights, that's where the government is getting control over states rights. And that's why it was put there!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Greetings,

This tragedy was cause by the Rehnquist Court's usurping power delegated by Congress under the Rules Enabling Act.

As a federal trial/appellate private practitioner for more than three decades, I support Sotomayor appointment based on her holding that government employees, including judges, are not above the law. The issue which you raise is one that in truth Congress must correct by the abuse of the Rules Enabling Act by the Rhenquist/Roberts Court, i.e. making the Federal rules so complicated that the aim of the rules to give access to the court to all.

I as a old Republican do not support the surreal and hypocritical statements of the "conservative Republican" Senators presented today. The evidence confirms based on three decades of litigation before the Rehnquist/Roberts Court, the Supremes do not comply with the Rule of Law or the Constitution. We have Associate Justice Scalia stating that they do not need to follow or distinguish stare decisis; we have Associate Justice stating that the Bill of Rights is now replaced by the Bill of Obligation; and we have Roberts, Stevens, Souter, et al., affirm criminal acts and void order of government employees and judges at both the State and Federal level.

Since 2002 neither the Bush nor Obama White House, nor Congress, and nor the Virginia General Assembly have acted on my repeated petitions for an investigation of the malfeasance of Federal and Virginia government attorneys and judges obstructing my statutory right as a father and depriving me of my right/duty as a Virginia attorney (see, 2009 presentation to Northern VA Delegates, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ, and (http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml), I filed just filed a criminal complaint with law enforcement authorities in Virginia to investigate, arrest, indict, and prosecute for treason and obstruction of justice by misprision of felony by treason in violation of Va. Code §§ 18.2-481 and 482, by an on going criminal business conspiracy by Republican candidate for Governor, former Att. Gen Bob McDonnell, Virginia government attorney and judges (http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/).

Query, if I as an experienced federal litigator cannot protect my self from malfeasance by government attorneys and judges what is a young attorney or laymen parent to do to protect his and his children rights?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE COURT COULD RUIN ALL TESTING!

The dozens of written exams taken by Americans…from Firemen, to medical, to legal, to CPAs, to GREs, to whatever…can and WILL BE DESTROYED by a Supreme Court that “thinks” like Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
This pair of lefty wingnuts reject “interpretation of the constitution” and replace it with get-even-with-them angry activist social engineering.
Do really want an America where you score an 80 and people with a 70 get that promotion because they are some “imagined deprived minority” in the minds of the activist court?

What kind of America results when this affirmation action (aka reverse discrimination) permeates the culture?
This lefty former ACLU lead counsel Ginsburg said that a written section of the Firemen’s test AUTOMATICALLY discriminated against black folks. She said this in 2009, not 1959. She said this after 3 generations of public school integration. She said this after dozens of black millionaires and a growing black middle class for decades. Look around the country and tell this lefty there are hundreds of thousands of professional black leaders in every aspect of American life. Do you see the pandering insult this is? There go the high school and college entry tests writing sections if kook rule the court.

Do you see discrimination cannot be ended by discrimination?
Do you see this sickness of modern liberalism here?
Do you see its an illogical mental disorder?
Sotomayor also has this ugly liberal virus.

What is all constant “historic” baloney?
Can Republicans one day say their nominee is “historic” because he/she is in a wheelchair? Is 7 feet tall? Is a billionaire? Is bald? Weighs 300? Is an ex-con? This aspect is a large diversion used by the secular socialists to fog up their nominee’s kooky activist record (but then libs always divide and see folks in groups…mostly helpless victims needing gov-meant).

http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SOMEHOW OUR U.S. CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD HAVE DECIDED AND APPROVED CURRENT LEGISLATION TO SPEND 50 BILLION AMERICAN TAX $$$ IN THE INTERNATIONAL FIGHT AGAINST AIDS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS BEFORE TAKING CARE OF OUR OWN POORER AMERICANS HERE AT HOME FIRST !

MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS ARE UNABLE TO AFFORD PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN THEIR CIVIL,CRIMINAL AND FAMILY COURTS OF LAW ALL ACROSS AMERICA CAUSING TREMENDOUS HARDSHIPS NATIONWIDE,BUT THESE GREAT MINDS and callous hearts IN OUR AMERICAN CONGRESS HAVE FOUND OTHERS WORLDWIDE MORE NEEDY THEN THEIR OWN CITIZENS WHO ARE BEING FALSELY INCARCERATED,WRONGFULY EXECUTED,LOSING THEIR HOMES OR APARTMENTS,LOSING CHILD CUSTODY OR VISITATION WITH THEIR CHILDREN ETC...

NOT BEING AFFORDED PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION BY OUR U.S.CONGRESS HAS CREATED A TOTAL BREAKDOWN OF THE AMERICAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM FOR OUR POORER AMERICANS BECAUSE THE AMERICAN COURTS PUNISH ALL OF US LITTLE PEOPLE IF WE ARE NOT ASSISTED WITH PROPRER LEGAL COUNSEL.
IT IS A KNOWN FACT THAT OUR AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS WITHOUT PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN ALL OF OUR AMERICAN COURTS OF LAW LOSE THEIR LEGAL CASES TO THE BETTER FINANCED WHO ARE ABLE TO AFFORD LAWYERS.


LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS NOW ACTIVELY IN THE HUNT FOR INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES AND LEADERS WORLDWIDE TO HELP RAISE 5 BILLION DOLLAR$ FOR OUR SLIGHTED POORER AMERICANS WHO HAVE HAD THEIR OWN AMERICAN CONGRESS TURN THEIR BACKS ON THEIR DESPERATE NEEDS IN NOT AFFORDING THEM PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION.

TROY DAVIS AND MUMIA ABU - JAMAL ARE 2 PERFECT EXAMPLES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO NEVER HAD PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AFFORDED THEM BY OUR U.S. CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD IN THEIR INITIAL CRIMINAL TRIALS IN (GEORGIA AND PENNSYLVANIA) WHO MIGHT VERY WELL HAVE TO PAY THE ULTIMATE PRICE OF POSSIBLY BEING FALSELY EXECUTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

THIS IS THE FIRST OF MANY WWW INTERNATIONAL PLEAS BY LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS FOR OTHER LEADERS AND COUNTRIES TO HELP RAISE THE NEEDED MONIE$ TO CORRECT THESE BLATANT INJUSTICES THAT HAVE BEEN INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICANS FOR THE LAST FEW DECADES.



LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS HAS MANY OTHER WRITTEN ARTICLES THAT CAN BE VIEWED WITH ANY WWW SEARCH ENGINE BY OUR NAME OR OUR TELEPHONE NUMBER.

LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A WWW LOBBY GROUP OF VOLUNTEERS THAT SING OUT ABOUT THE DECADES OLD NEGLECT,ABUSE AND INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON OUR POORER AMERICANS THAT HAVE BECOME CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ISSUES FOR THE INTERNATIONAL WORLD COURT TO INVESTIGATE.


lawyersforpooreramericans@yahoo.com
(424-247-2013)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems to me that Sotomayor followed the law in this case. This may sound crass, but this is a case that perfectly runs counter to the "empathy" charge that is running through the echo chamber.

The law in question sucks, but she was bound to act within its parameters. If your ire is to be directed anywhere, it should be at the Congress who passed the law, not the judge who was bound for follow it.

(Also, Judges usually can't overturn a law unless the law itself is in question)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In Deskovic v. Mann, 531 U.S. 1088, the Supreme Court affirmed Deskovic v. Mann, 210 F.3d 354, the decision that went against you. If she could have talked the other judges into siding with you, Mann would appealed and won. Blame your incompetent attorney for not getting the paper work in on time. Why did he leave it for the last minute anyway?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unfortunately nobody in this country believes they can get access to the court system without cutting in the middleman, attorneys that is. They are expert at maneuvering people's cases , and lives, to maximize their fees. The lawyer probably assumed an extension would be given, thereby justifiying another round of billing. Oops, late filing lost the case for this guy, darn I'll just have to wait till next week to make that boat payment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DVD to MP4 Mac+|+Mac TOD Converter/……&/Mac DVD to MOV

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The issue involved here is the promulgation of the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure.

My past three decades of federal litigation confirm the judicial policy of the Rehnquist/Roberts Court has been to conspire with DOJ to undercut the Rule of Law and Constitution by abuse of the delegated authority under the Rules Enabling Act, and U.S. Judicial Conference Act, i.e Justices Roberts, Stevens, Souter, Scalia, Thomas, et al., have held that the need not follow stare decisis, denial of the right to jury trial, and granting both the Executive and Judicial Branch are absolutely immune from accountability for tortious and criminal acts, that the Bill of Rights is replaced by the Bill of Obligation; and affirm criminal void orders (http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml).

Thus, it is nearsighted and incorrect to place the blame on Sotomayor. She had not other option, but follow procedure mandated by court rules.

Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., Member in Good Standing of the Bar of the United States Supreme Court

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She evades and avoids the question, 'do citizens have the right to self-defense?' No excuses anyone..I have a problem with that alone..

1789

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The "late filing" of the appeal WAS THE LAWYER's fault! Any lawyer would refer to any jurisdiction's "rules of the court" in order to have avoided the late filing...
Also the assertion that Sotomayor "....chose procedure over innocence" is way misleading. Once again, there are procedural rules in any jurisdiction.....you wanna appael, then you had better follow the procedural rules!!!!! The writer should sue his attorney for malpractice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sotomayor and the incompetent attorney are side issues in this injustice though both are guilty of putting justice on the back burner. Prosecutors and police don't get an innocent person convicted of a major crime by accident. They have to work at it. They have to brush aside exculpating evidence and even invent evidence e.g. by bullying a false confession out of a 16-year-old kid. They have to pervert the course of justice. They need to be named and shamed and demands made that they and their ilk be prosecuted for the crime they have committed. So should the trial judge for allowing a forced confession to be admitted as evidence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spending time in jail for a crime that you did not commit is unfortunately not a unique circumstance. It is unforgivable and not easily remedied.

Who this "colleague" of judge Sotomayor of which he speaks? Did s/he have equal say in this decision? Was this solely the responsibility of judge Sotomayor?

I actually agree with the judge (and her "colleague") that the lawyer relied too much on information given to him by a court clerk, and that he should have practiced due diligence in establishing the necessary legal safeguards for circumstances with which he was unfamiliar (the filing vs postmarked dates).

This sounds callous, but his conviction was a legal aberration--a case with false & misleading evidence, a forced confession, and compounded by a lawyer who did not properly file an appeal.

Even had he be given the opportunity to appeal his conviction, would judge Sotomayor and her "colleague" have voted in his favor? This is not, unfortunately, a foregone conclusion. What of the police interrogators, the forensic specialists and the lower court judges who ruled against him in the first place?

That he lost 16 years of his life in jail is a terrible loss that cannot be repaid, but he should be careful where we lays blame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks for a resourceful content. this is what i have been looking for so long. I don't get the idea why they start these kind of trial when the criminal are old. Perhaps this more personal form of accountability will deter future actors where the fear of international condemnation has not. Ed Hardy stores are located in many locations internationally including the Americas, Europe and Asia.

---------------------------
Ed Hardy | Cheap Ed Hardy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is definitely a sad story. I would be furious being in that situation knowing I was innocent, however, from what I'm reading of his appeal in front of Sotomayor, the case had been fully tried and he had a bad lawyer for filing late, but that does seem like such a flimsy excuse not to retry someone, unless in reading the case, it didn't seem that he had further defense to offer. I also am appalled that the Supreme Court recently judged that they will not allow DNA tests after a conviction even if it had never been tested. There is so much wrong with that that it is frustrating. An innocent person could be in jail while the guilty one gets away with it. I used to think that Supreme Court Judges were thorough, fair and usually right then came Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and Alito. It is hard to have any kind of trust any more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]