Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#276

Post by bob » Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:09 pm

"For completeness":
P&E wrote:On April 18, two judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order responsive to Arpaio’s Writ of Mandamus instructing the “United States of America,” or “real party in interest,” to respond within 14 days. “This petition for a writ of mandamus raises issues that warrant an answer,” wrote Judges McKeown and Hurwitz in their brief two-page order.

* * *

Despite a cacophony of media reports virtually crowing about Arpaio’s criminal indictment at the time, the same media has fallen strangely silent given the aforementioned recent developments.
The 9th's (boilerplate) order.
The 9th's order reads:
This petition for a writ of mandamus raises issues that warrant an answer. See Fed. R. App. P. 21(b). Accordingly, within 14 days after the date of this order, the real party in interest shall file an answer.

The district court, within 14 days after the date of this order, may address the petition if it so desires. The district court may elect to file an answer with this court or to issue a supplemental order and serve a copy on this court. Petitioner may file a reply within 5 days after service of the answer(s). The petition, answer(s), and any reply shall be referred to the next available motions panel.

The Clerk shall serve this order on the district court and District Judge Bolton.
That language should look familiar to Rondeau because it is the exact same language (except for the judge's name) that was issued in October 2016 when the 9th ordered a response in Montgomery's petition to intervene. Because it is a boilerplate call for response, and the standard for requiring a response is fairly low.

Rondeau uncritically parrots Zullo's belief that it is notable that the 9th called for a response. Yet six weeks after the same "big-deal" order in Montgomery's petition, the 9th in December 2016 denied that petition -- without argument.


If the past is prologue, the 9th's June motions panel will deny Arpaio's petition around June 13. Plenty of time for Arpaio to beg for yet another continuance in the district court before the scheduled start of his June 26 trial.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 2905
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:36 pm
Location: Twin Cities

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#277

Post by MN-Skeptic » Sat May 20, 2017 2:35 am

From the Arizona Republic -

Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio loses another bid for jury trial on contempt charge
An appeals court has rejected former Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s bid to have a jury, rather than a judge, decide whether he is guilty of a criminal contempt-of-court charge for disobeying a court order in a racial profiling case.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that Arpaio didn’t show that his request warranted its intervention in the case.

The former six-term sheriff of metro Phoenix faces the misdemeanor charge for defying a 2011 court order in a racial profiling case to stop his signature immigration patrols.

Arpaio has acknowledged prolonging the patrols, but insists his disobedience wasn’t intentional.

If convicted, the 84-year-old could be sentenced up to six months in jail.

His trial is scheduled to begin on June 26.
[Because of the single sentence paragraphs, I included the entire article.]


MAGA - Morons Are Governing America

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#278

Post by bob » Sat May 20, 2017 10:29 am

The. 9th's terse denial.

Two messages up, I predicted this denial wouldn't happen until June 13. :bag:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 11952
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#279

Post by Plutodog » Tue May 23, 2017 2:58 pm

NYT on Arpaio's life after election loss:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/us/j ... &smtyp=cur
FOUNTAIN HILLS, Ariz. — Joe Arpaio, the onetime sheriff in this part of the West, still talks about his former job, the one he was unceremoniously ousted from last fall, in the present tense.

Pushed into retirement by voters who tired of his colorful ways, Mr. Arpaio has gone from being a public official working 14-hour days to a civilian with a mostly empty calendar.

His flip phone hardly rings. He has no driver to shuttle him around or assistants to cater to him. He never had time to develop a hobby, so he has to learn to find pleasure in “little things” — steering his red Cadillac around town, or searching for his name on Google.

“I average six Googles a day,” he said, referring to the number of new mentions of him when he runs his name through Google. That is a far cry from the attention heaped on him during his 24 years in office, when he was nicknamed “America’s toughest sheriff,” and relished acting the part.


The only good Bundy is an Al Bundy.

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8206
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#280

Post by RoadScholar » Tue May 23, 2017 4:18 pm

:violin: :twoup:


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#281

Post by bob » Fri May 26, 2017 1:29 pm

PNT: Ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio Begs U.S. Supreme Court for Jury Trial in Criminal Contempt Case:
Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed an urgent petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday in a last-chance bid for a jury trial or delay of his upcoming bench trial for criminal contempt.

* * *

His lawyers assert in a 47-page motion to the High Court that failing to grant Arpaio a jury trial would be "undemocratic."

Besides that, he's too old to wait around for an appeal should he be convicted, the document argues.

"Defendant will suffer a wrongful trial and could suffer a wrongful sentence," wrote lawyers from local firms Goldman & Zwillinger, PLLC, and Wilenchik & Bartness, P.C. "If Defendant, who is eighty-four years old, dies before a reversal on direct appeal, then the sentence will stand."[*]

* * *

The petition also the court to consider delaying the bench trial if the justices can't reach a decision on the petition before June 26, noting that Bolton has denied any further delays and that the petition is Arpaio's final opportunity for a stay of trial.

Arpaio wants the U.S. Supreme Court to decide quickly whether to take the case. He wants the court to consider the petition at its June 15 conference, "otherwise, the occurrence of trial will render his Petition moot."
Arpaio's petition is available at the link; it has not yet been docketed.


*
Arpaio's argument centers on the idea that a conviction by the federal court, if it comes down to that, would not be seen by the public as legitimate.
If Arpaio dies pending appeal, then the conviction is abated; if Arpaio dies pending retrial, there will be no conviction. (Regardless of how "the public" "sees" it.)


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#282

Post by bob » Wed May 31, 2017 4:46 pm

The petition also the court to consider delaying the bench trial if the justices can't reach a decision on the petition before June 26, noting that Bolton has denied any further delays and that the petition is Arpaio's final opportunity for a stay of trial.

Arpaio wants the U.S. Supreme Court to decide quickly whether to take the case. He wants the court to consider the petition at its June 15 conference, "otherwise, the occurrence of trial will render his Petition moot."
Rut-roh; SCOTUS No. 16-1422:
May 24 2017 Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due June 29, 2017)


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#283

Post by rpenner » Wed May 31, 2017 7:22 pm

:violin:



User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15882
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#284

Post by Reality Check » Wed May 31, 2017 8:33 pm

rpenner wrote::violin:
Joe should have filed an emergency motion with Gorsuch. Didn't he learn anything from Cody Judy and Sharon Rondeau? :rotflmao:


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#285

Post by bob » Thu Jun 01, 2017 4:26 pm

KTAR: Arizona prosecutors can mention Joe Arpaio’s campaign remarks at trial:
Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio has lost a bid to bar prosecutors at his upcoming criminal trial from mentioning comments that he made about immigration during his last three campaigns.

Two people who were illegally detained by one of the then-sheriff’s immigration patrols can testify at his upcoming criminal trial.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday rejected Arpaio’s argument that such comments would have a chilling effect on protected speech.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9440
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 1 dog, 1 cat, and 1 horse, 4 granddogs, and one grandcat.

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#286

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Thu Jun 01, 2017 5:38 pm

bob wrote:KTAR: Arizona prosecutors can mention Joe Arpaio’s campaign remarks at trial:
Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio has lost a bid to bar prosecutors at his upcoming criminal trial from mentioning comments that he made about immigration during his last three campaigns.

Two people who were illegally detained by one of the then-sheriff’s immigration patrols can testify at his upcoming criminal trial.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday rejected Arpaio’s argument that such comments would have a chilling effect on protected speech.
:happyfamily: :happydance: :happydance: :bwaha:


A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: On July 28, 1919, Arkansas became the 12th state to adopt the 19th Amendment.

User avatar
SLQ
Posts: 3043
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:33 am

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#287

Post by SLQ » Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:04 pm

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:
bob wrote:KTAR: Arizona prosecutors can mention Joe Arpaio’s campaign remarks at trial:
Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio has lost a bid to bar prosecutors at his upcoming criminal trial from mentioning comments that he made about immigration during his last three campaigns.

Two people who were illegally detained by one of the then-sheriff’s immigration patrols can testify at his upcoming criminal trial.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday rejected Arpaio’s argument that such comments would have a chilling effect on protected speech.
:happyfamily: :happydance: :happydance: :bwaha:
It's as though he hasn't even read the news by the appellate courts about Trump's attempts to avoid his campaign speech.


"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try."
-- Yoda

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9440
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 1 dog, 1 cat, and 1 horse, 4 granddogs, and one grandcat.

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#288

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:43 pm

In Arpaio's world there is only Arpaio.


A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment: On July 28, 1919, Arkansas became the 12th state to adopt the 19th Amendment.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15882
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#289

Post by Reality Check » Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:21 pm

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:In Arpaio's world there is only Arpaio.
You are undoubtedly correct. I suspect he is having a hard time adjusting to being Joe Nobody, checking daily for the number of times people search his name on Google.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12999
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#290

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:34 pm

Reality Check wrote:
Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:In Arpaio's world there is only Arpaio.
You are undoubtedly correct. I suspect he is having a hard time adjusting to being Joe Nobody, checking daily for the number of times people search his name on Google.
Probably not since he no longer has that assistant to do all that look up for him. I doubt if he knows how to turn a computer on.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#291

Post by bob » Wed Jun 07, 2017 5:43 pm

Ariz. Rep.: Roberts: Arpaio's latest fundraising plea? Give so he won't go to jail for life:
Ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio may be politically dead but his fundraising machine is alive and well.

It seems the sheriff, who will turn 85 next week, soon may be “locked away for life.”
:roll:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#292

Post by bob » Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:19 pm

The petition also the court to consider delaying the bench trial if the justices can't reach a decision on the petition before June 26, noting that Bolton has denied any further delays and that the petition is Arpaio's final opportunity for a stay of trial.

Arpaio wants the U.S. Supreme Court to decide quickly whether to take the case. He wants the court to consider the petition at its June 15 conference, "otherwise, the occurrence of trial will render his Petition moot."
SCOTUS No. 16-1422:
May 24 2017 Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of mandamus filed by petitioner.
Jun 6 2017 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 22, 2017.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27353
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#293

Post by bob » Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:46 pm

Breitbart: 40,000 Petitions in Support of Sheriff Joe Delivered to DOJ:
40,000 signed petitions calling for an end to the prosecution of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio were hand-delivered to the Department of Justice by National Center for Police Defense (NCPD) President James Fotis Wednesday.

* * *

A delegation from the NCPD, having collected over 40,000 signed petitions in support of Arpaio, came to deliver them personally at the main DOJ building in Washington, DC. James Fotis, the non-profit organization’s president, was met outside by Justice Department Deputy Director of Public Affairs Wyn Hornbuckle, who shook his hand and accepted the petitions.
Some obvious fake news:
As things stand today, Arpaio’s misdemeanor trial is still scheduled in Federal Court in Phoenix at the end of the month.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29118
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#294

Post by Foggy » Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:18 pm

Maricopa County has 4 million people now. So even if every signature on the petition is from a county resident (and they would say so if it was true), they'd have only 1% of the people who live there.

Color me unimpressed. :smoking:


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

USA v. Arpaio (Criminal Contempt)

#295

Post by Tesibria » Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:21 am

Cross-posting here and in Sheriff Joe's Excellent Federal Court Adventures

For those interested, the WYE Timeline, including the Melendres case (and all the appeals) and the criminal contempt case (and appeals), is caught up through yesterday.

Depending on how far you want to go back ...

April 21 (first "new" entry since last major update)

May

June
======================
RE: THE CRIMINAL CASE
The "big stuff" has already been reported -- but as FYI, on June 16, Judge Bolton denied Casey's motion to quash, finding that Casey was MCSO/the Sheriff's OFFICE attorney -- not Arpaio's individual attorney (among other reasons).


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#296

Post by Tesibria » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:48 am

Docket's getting quite active again (unsurprisingly...)
06/19/2017 -- 161 -- MOTION to Quash Subpoena of U.S. Attorney General [Jeff Sessions] by USA as to Joseph M Arpaio. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Keller, John) (Entered: 06/19/2017)

06/19/2017 -- 162 -- TRIAL BRIEF by USA as to Joseph M Arpaio. (Keller, John) (Entered: 06/19/2017)

06/20/2017 -- 164 -- ORDER as to Joseph M Arpaio: The Court is in receipt of the Government's Motion to Quash Defendant's Trial Subpoena to U.S. Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions (Doc. 161 ). IT IS ORDERED directing Defense counsel to file a response no later than 5:00 p.m., June 21, 2017. The Government shall file its reply no later than Noon, June 23, 2017. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 6/20/17.(MAW) (Entered: 06/20/2017)

06/20/2017 -- 165 -- MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Strike United States Trial Memorandum by Joseph M Arpaio. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Wilenchik, Dennis) (Entered: 06/20/2017)
  • Arpaio accuses the USA of prosecutorial misconduct (by quoting Casey communications - about which Casey testified in the Melendres hearings....), and asks for a mistrial, recusal, and transfer to another venue if the court or any staff have actually read the brief... and more.
06/20/2017 -- 166 -- MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Stay District Court Proceedings Pending Resolution of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus of Joseph M. Arpaio in the Supreme Court of the United States of America by Joseph M Arpaio. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Motion for Leave to File Motion to Stay District Court Proceedings, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Order Staying Proceedings Pending Resolution of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus of Joseph M. Arpaio in the Supreme Court of the U.S.A.)(Mayr, Vincent) (Entered: 06/20/2017)
Links available on WYE.

~~~
Off Topic ....
Sad to learn from the USA's Trial Brief that John MacIntyre is in hospice. Life is Short. Live Well.


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#297

Post by Tesibria » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:50 am

Cross-posting Bob's info b/c it goes to the criminal contempt case...
bob wrote:ABC: Feds oppose calling Jeff Sessions to testify at Joe Arpaio's trial:
Federal prosecutors pushed back on former Sheriff Joe Arpaio's bid to call Attorney General Jeff Sessions to testify at the Arizona lawman's upcoming criminal contempt trial.

Lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice urged a judge in a court filing Monday to reject Arpaio's subpoena of Sessions.

* * *

Prosecutors say Arpaio hasn't shown any extraordinary circumstances to call Sessions, the federal government's top lawyer, to testify on a matter on which he had no involvement or firsthand knowledge.


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8589
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#298

Post by Northland10 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:04 am

Thank you, Tes. :worship:


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15882
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#299

Post by Reality Check » Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:00 am

Prediction: Either the motion for stay will be moot by the time the trial starts on Monday or it will be denied before.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Re: Arpaio (et al.) criminal contempt case

#300

Post by Tesibria » Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:02 am

Docket Update:
06/21/2017 -- 167 -- RESPONSE to Motion by Joseph M Arpaio re: 161 MOTION to Quash Subpoena of U.S. Attorney General Defendants Response to Government's Motion to Quash Defendant's Trial Subpoena to US Attonrney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions. (Wilenchik, Dennis) (Entered: 06/21/2017)

06/21/2017 -- 168 -- RESPONSE in Opposition by USA as to Joseph M Arpaio re: 165 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Strike United States Trial Memorandum . (Keller, John) (Entered: 06/21/2017)
(Docs @ Jack's Scribd / WYE.)


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

Post Reply

Return to “Courts, Law, and Legal Issues”