Archive for September, 2009


September 30th, 2009

Judge Watch: Tarrant County Judge Tiffany Lewis Pleads Guilty, Goes to Jail

Tiffany Lewis’s life will never be the same now that she’s pled guilty to taking client money — lots of client money — in a probate case … but we’re not too sure how ashamed she is just yet ….

On September 15, 2009, former judge Tiffany Lewis pled guilty just as testimony was about to start.

Must have been dramatic earlier this month, there in the courtroom, with the jury of 12 chosen and empaneled, the pre-trial motions all done and the lawyers having just finished their openings. That’s because just before testimony began, Tiffany Lewis decided to take a plea. 

Tiffany Lewis knows all about courtroom procedure and trial tactics … she was both a Dallas prosecutor and a member of the criminal defense bar before taking the bench as a Tarrant County Municipal Court Judge.  She knew how to pick her moment. 

Former Judge Lewis pled guilty to a felony charge of misapplication of fiduciary funds, which is punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. (She’s alleged to have taken around $70,000).  She was sentenced to 60 days in jail and 10 years probation.  (The State Bar of Texas already ordered her to payback the money that was taken.)

Courtroom Dramatics and Trial Judge’s Warning to Lewis

This was bittersweet for the prosecutors, since they’d spend countless hours tediously going through all the paperwork necessary to prove up a money case like this. Opting for a plea there in the courtroom battlefield isn’t a happy occasion for a criminal defense trial lawyer, either, in most instances (though we’ve got no info on how Lewis’ attorneys felt that day).

The Judge was apparently very displeased with Tiffany Lewis. Visiting judge David Cleveland told his former fellow jurist that she cannot represent herself as an attorney — because since she’s not a lawyer anymore, having been disbarred by the State Bar of Texas back in 2005.  According to those in the courtroom that day, Judge Cleveland also told Lewis that “someone put their trust in you, and you should hang your head in shame.”  Then he sent her off to jail. 

Shame?  Shame Indeed.  Tiffany Lewis has made her mark in Dallas history.

Perhaps you’ve heard of the ”Tiffany Lewis Clause.”  This was a change made to the Dallas City Charter all because of Tiffany Lewis.  Seems she refused to resign from her job as a municipal court judge even after she had lost her law license and was no longer legally an attorney.  Not only did the State Bar of Texas disbar Tiffany Lewis, but they ordered her to payback her clients $58,225, plus 5 percent interest accrued since August 2003.  That’s a lot of moola. 

In the face of this public denunciation, Judge Lewis still wouldn’t quit the bench, and there wasn’t anything in the charter to force her to do so.  (Hence the “Tiffany Lewis Clause.”)  Let’s consider the shame quotient here. 

Shame?  Not then.  When she was disbarred and sitting on the bench, Judge Lewis denied that she did anything wrong – someone else “close to her” had stolen the cash.  Her position was the State Bar was being too tough on her, and she sat there on the bench, making legal rulings in the face of the disbarment and not caring about the appearance this gave to the legal profession, the judiciary, or the system of justice as a whole. 

In 60 days, Tiffany Lewis will be out of jail.  She’s probably gonna have a happy Christmas dinner with her family.  You gotta wonder if she’ll get it by then … what all she’s  done wrong here.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 4:04 pm

2 Comments
Labels: Judge Watch


September 28th, 2009

Cop Watch: Local Police Depts Have to Pay for Crime Lab Testing Now

Times are tight and getting tighter, so counties across the State of Texas are finding all sorts of ways to cut costs.  Here in Dallas, that means something to the criminal defense bar and prosecutors alike because who’s footing the bill for testing of DNA, firearms, blood, etc.  has changed.

The Dallas County District Attorney’s Office isn’t going to pay for everyone’s crime lab tests anymore.

Before now, if a prosecutor ordered a lab test, Dallas County paid for it.  However, the Commissioners for Dallas County — looking at a $60 million shortfall in the budget — instructed all departments in the county to cut their departmental budgets by 10 percent.  

This edict has trickled down to impact every criminal defendant in the county — because all the tests being done by the county crime lab, the Southwest Institute of Forensic Sciences, will have to be paid for by the police departments involved in the arrest or investigation.   

What Will This Mean for Local Police Departments?

Police department budgets are just as stretched as everyone else’s — and suddenly, they’ve got to take on costs that for years they’ve been relying upon Dallas County to cover.   Surprise, surprise.  Reportedly, law enforcement will not be required to pay in advance for lab tests but they will have to enter into an agreement to pay the fee.

The Reality Is That There’s Gonna Be Less Lab Tests Run

What does this mean to the accused?  Probably less testing.  Lab tests aren’t going to be done unless absolutely necessary because of these cost cuts. 

This is Going to Hurt People

And, innocent people will be wrongfully accused because lab tests haven’t been done to rule them out.   We all know this is going to happen. 

Of course, it’s not as if the lab tests that are done by the crime labs are really trusted, anyway.  For details on how inaccurate and biased the crime lab results can be, check out Grits for Breakfasts’ discussion of the Houston Crime Lab.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 4:08 pm

No Comments
Labels: Cop Watch, Crime News, DA Watch


September 24th, 2009

Judge Watch: RIP Judge Jerry Buchmeyer

The Honorable Jerry Buchmeyer died this week in a San Marcos nursing home at the age of 76, after serving the bench for over 30 years.  Considered by many to be a liberal judge, with landmark decisions involving both public housing and redistricting in this state, he achieved even more notoriety for his now famous sense of humor. 

His blog, Say What?!, technically made Judge Buchmeyer one of the first ”blawggers” in our state, and certainly, one of the first jurists to become a blogger.   The posts themselves are repeats of his beloved column in the Texas Bar Journal, entitled “et cetera,” where each month lawyers, judges, and others involved in the legal profession could get a good chuckle from the Judge’s selection of real-life courtroom (and deposition) humor.   Here’s an example of what Judge Buchmeyer gave us:

November 1996 – Did They Really Say That?

From John H. Spurgin, II of Austin (McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore), this excerpt from his deposition of the plaintiff in a wrongful discharge case:

Q. Did Rusty White ever attack your person? Did he ever assault you?

A. Well, he used profound (sic) language towards me.

Q. You say he used “profound language”?

A. Uh-huh.

Judge Buchmeyer will be noted in our legal history books as the jurist responsible for the desegregation of public housing; his rejection of single-member districts (which caused statewide redistricting); and last but not least, as the judge who struck down Texas’ anti-sodomy law.  Still, many of us practicing law will remember him with gratitude for the laugh he guaranteed us every month — and in the law, laughter is always welcome and usually needed.

Our condolences to the family and friends of Judge Jerry Buchmeyer.  And our thanks to a treasured jurist. 

A memorial service for Judge Buchmeyer will be held October 2, 2009, at the Belo Mansion here in Dallas.  Memorials in his name may be made to the Judge Buchmeyer Scholarship Fund at the University of Texas School of Law, 727 E. Dean Keaton Street, Austin, Texas, 78705.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 12:32 am

No Comments
Labels: Judge Watch


September 21st, 2009

Judge Watch: Court of Crim Appeals Says Not Unfair to Defendant Hood for Judge and DA to Have Affair During Trial

If you’re shaking your head in disbelief at this week’s ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals — well, join the crowd.  

When the news first hit that a trial court judge and the district attorney who prosecuted cases in her courtroom had had a long-standing sexual relationship, lots of folk were stunned.  And lots expected something To.Be.Done.About.This.  (See earlier post by this blog.)

Especially Charles Hood and his appellate counsel.  Hood was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death in a trial before Judge Verna Sue Holland with D.A. Tom O’Connell putting on the state’s case.   Seems pretty easy to think that Hood deserves a fair trial, right? 

Charles Dean Hood Sits on Texas’ Death Row, Knowing that During The Trial that sent him to death, the Judge and the DA were playing footsy

It isn’t even up for debate at this juncture:  trial court judge Verna Sue Holland and prosecutor Tom O’Connell, Jr. were involved romantically (yes — having an affair, a sexual relationship) while the capital murder trial of Charlie Hood was taking place.  Let’s think about that … shouldn’t this be strongly and swiftly punished? NOT allowed? 

Apparently not in Charlie Hood’s case.  This week, the high court has decided that Hood doesn’t get a fair trial because — wait for it — Hood should have brought it up earlier.  In an earlier writ.  Not making this up, folks.

What the heck?  Read what the Court decided — here’s the opinion and the dissent.

The highest state court on the subject just denied Charles Hood’s request that he have a new trial.  Here’s the Majority Opinion. Per Curiam, Not to be Published.   Not everyone agreed. Here’s the Dissenting Statement by Justice Cochran, who is joined by Justices Price and Holcomb.   The dissent sure makes sense — kudos to Justices Cochran, Price, and Holcomb.

What about the undisputed facts that the Judge and the DA BOTH LIED REPEATEDLY about having this sexual relationship? 

Here, the litany of facts listed in this week’s Dissent:

  1. Judge Verla Sue Holland of the 296th Judicial District Court of Collin County, presided over Hood’s capital murder trial.
  2. The elected District Attorney of Collin County, Thomas S. O’Connell, Jr., participated in the prosecution of Hood for capital murder.
  3. Judge Holland and Mr. O’Connell were involved in an intimate sexual relationship prior to Hood’s capital murder trial.
  4. Prior to the capital murder trial-and during the appellate and post-conviction proceedings-Judge Holland never disclosed her relationship with Mr. O’Connell to Hood.
  5. During these proceedings, Mr. O’Connell never disclosed his relationship with Judge Holland to Hood.
  6. Judge Holland and Mr. O’Connell took deliberate measures to ensure that their affair would remain secret. . . . Mr. O’Connell could not recall telling anyone, except possibly his sisters, about his romantic relationship with Judge Holland. Judge Holland told no one.
  7. Based only on rumors of an affair, Hood’s former habeas counsel decided to look into the matter prior to filing the initial habeas application. In 1995-96, Hood’s investigator, Tena S. Francis, conducted extensive records research. She reviewed divorce records, records obtained from the Office of Elections Administration, and case files in the Collin County District Clerk’s Office. Ms. Francis interviewed members of Hood’s defense team, attorneys practicing in Collin County, and Judge Holland’s former husband, Earl Holland. She attempted to interview Judge Holland’s bailiff, but he refused to discuss the judge’s personal life with her. She contacted the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
  8. Ms. Francis was unable to develop any concrete evidence of the affair.
  9. On June 27, 2005, shortly before Hood’s scheduled execution date, A. Richard Ellis, former counsel for Hood, contacted Judge Holland. She refused to comment on the allegations that she had a romantic affair with Mr. O’Connell. On the same day, Mr. Ellis contacted Mr. O’Connell. Mr. O’Connell denied that he had a romantic affair with Judge Holland.
  10. On June 3, 2008, Hood received the affidavit of Matthew Goeller, a former assistant district attorney in Collin County, Texas.
  11. Mr. Goeller’s affidavit marked the first time that a former employee of the District Attorney’s Office who had worked there during Mr. O’Connell’s tenure was willing to speak on the record and under oath about the relationship.
  12. Mr. Goeller stated that the romantic relationship between Judge Holland and Mr. O’Connell was ongoing when Mr. Goeller began working at the District Attorney’s Office in 1987. Mr. Goeller could only assert that the relationship was “common knowledge,” not that he personally knew of any romantic interactions. 
  13. In June 2008, counsel for Hood retained Toni Knox, a private investigator. She reviewed the work previously conducted by Ms. Francis and then interviewed approximately two dozen individuals in the Collin County area who seemed likely to have some knowledge of the Holland-O’Connell affair.
  14. The witnesses could only attest that they had heard rumors about the affair.

Hood’s Life is at Stake –  as is the Reputation of Our State’s Criminal Justice System

A man’s life is at stake here.  Charles Hood is sentenced to die as a result of the trial overseen by Judge Holland and based upon a case presented by her lover-prosecutor.  Surely a new trial is warranted here, and the idea that a writ should have been filed sooner and therefore, he should be executed based on that secretly sexy trial, is simply a dog that won’t hunt.   

And the nation knows it, and our courts are becoming a joke.  Just go read:

Salon Magazine this week:  “The Texas Justice System operates in a parallel universe ….”

CBS News:  Whitewash

USA Today this week:  read the comments….

By the way, Verna Sue Holland served on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals as a justice during the years 1997 - 2001 and she worked dailiy with EIGHT of the current nine justices on the CCA. 

 

Posted by Michael Lowe at 6:41 pm

2 Comments
Labels: Court Opinions, DA Watch, Death Row, Judge Watch, Orwellian Threats to Rights


September 16th, 2009

DA Watch: Texas Death Row Inmate Toney Freed Last Night and May Not Face Re-Trial

Michael Toney walked out of jail a free man last week after being on Texas’ Death Row for a decade.  Maybe you remember the case of Michael Toney….

Michael Toney Was Convicted for the Bombing Murder of 3 People – Nine Years Later, the DA Admits to Hiding Exculpatory Evidence

Last October, we posted about how the Tarrant County District Attorney held back favorable evidence in the Toney case for twenty-three (23) years.  From that post:

On Thanksgiving Day 1985, a bomb was left in a briefcase on the doorstep of a trailer in a mobile home park.

It exploded and killed three people (a 44-year-old man, his teenaged daughter, a teenaged relative) and severely wounded another (the victim’s 13 year-old son).

On October 2, 2008, another bomb of sorts hit this case: the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office officially admitted that evidence favorable to the defense was intentionally held back — and it was important stuff.

This evidence might have cleared Michael Toney — who sat through a jury trial, was found guilty, was then sentenced to death, and who has sat on Death Row since 1999. That’s 9 years on Death Row for a man who has consistently maintained his innocence of the crime.

In January, we posted about how the Texas Attorney General was taking over the Toney matter, since the Fort Worth prosecutors had recused themselves from the Toney case.   From that post:

Fourteen (14) separate documents that threw mud all over the evidence provided at trial against Toney by his ex-wife and his ex-best-friend — and theirs was the only witness evidence against him.

What does this mean?

By recusing itself, Tarrant County is transfering prosecution of this matter to the Attorney General for the State of Texas. It’s now the AG’s office that will have to decide whether or not to spend taxpayer money on a new trial for Michael Toney.

Right now, it’s unclear whether or not they’ve got enough evidence to pursue a case against him. (There was no physical evidence, and it’s not disputed that Toney had absolutely no connection with the three victims of the 1985 Thanksgiving Day bomb.)

What Happened This Week?  The Attorney General Dropped the Case and Moved to Dismiss – Giving Michael Toney His Freedom

Having taken over the case from the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office, the Texas Attorney General took over an ancient case from square one.  It was admittedly a burdensome task where the DA would be reviewing all the evidence — witnesses, testimony, documents, expert testing and opinion, etc. –  and then proceeding on behalf of the State of Texas in its efforts to punish Michael Toney.  (In December 2009, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned his conviction based upon the Tarrant County DA’s withholding of evidence.)

Apparently, the AG didn’t have the time to complete the job, given the November 2009 trial date, because a Motion to Dismiss was filed where the prosecution asked that the cae be dropped — and the reason given the trial court was insufficient time to review all the evidence and/or conduct adequate forensic testing before that trial deadline.   (Of course, the AG reserved its right to refile the case.)

The Attorney General filed its motion the day before it was to tell District Judge Everett Young whether or not the State would once again be seeking the death penalty.  A hearing was set for Thursday before Judge Young; the motion to dismiss automatically guts that setting.

So, last Wednesday, Michael Toney walked out of jail, a free man. 

Through his lawyers, he issued the following presser the next day:  “I have said all along that I was innocent of these charges and I know that when the Attorney General reviews the evidence, it will show that I am indeed innocent,” he said.

The Attorney General’s office is waffling on whether or not they’re going to continue pursuing Toney for this crime.  They had lingo in the dismissal motion about needing more time to get to know the case, investigate it thoroughly, and interestingly, to take advantage of the latest scientific evidence in dealing with fires, bombs, and such.

Do We See The Shadow of Cameron Todd Willingham?

Which is a good lesson to learn, given the Cameron Todd Willingham case.  You remember Cameron Todd Willingham — he was the man executed in 2004 by the State of Texas, only later to be confirmed innocent by arson experts.  Seems not only did Willingham not commit murder-by-arson (of his own kids), no one else did either.  New scientific review of the evidence revealed that the fire wasn’t arson at all.

Which isn’t to say that Willingham’s case can be analogized to Toney’s circumstances so far as to wonder if there was a bomb that went off that day long ago.  Safe to say there probably was a bomb.  However, maybe Willingham’s destiny may be to insure that there is clear and strongly supported forensic evidence before the State decides to seek to take the life of one of its citizens in the future.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 4:56 pm

8 Comments
Labels: Crime News, DA Watch, Death Row


September 14th, 2009

Cop Watch: Police Chief Charged With Public Lewdness – Allegations Involve Mistress, Parked Police Cars, and Hanky Panky

It’s probably safe to assume that Baldemar Flores will be reevaluating his plan to run for Mayor of Mission, Texas, next year ….

That’s because Mr. Flores is facing a misdemeanor charge of public lewdness, which carries a maximum punishment of one year in jail and a $4000 fine.   Not a good thing for anyone’s reputation, but especially not for Flores, since he’s been the Chief of Police for Alton, Texas for about a year and half — and since he’s already announced his intention to run for Mayor. 

Police Chief Allegedly Meeting Mistress for Over a Year

Chief Flores was arrested (he’s now out on personal recognizance after posting $5000 bond) after Mission police learned of a couple regularly meeting for sex behind a local auto parts store. 

According to the AutoZone manager, for over a year there had been a black BMW and a series of Alton police vehicles meeting up behind the store regularly in the afternoons, between noon and three.   A woman had been seen leaving the BMW and getting into the police cars.  

The manager personally saw on one occasion, according to the Complaint, the woman completely nude in an unmarked police car, having sex with a man in the front seat.   The BMW was parked nearby.    The manager said he recognized the man as Alton Chief Flores, having seen him recently on the news.  (An AutoZone employee confirmed the manager’s eyewitness accounts.  And you know this means the manager saw the two doing the Horizontal Mambo and called his employee to come out back and see this ….)

The AutoZone manager called Mission police and reported what he had seen.  He was asked by Mission police to call them the next time that he saw the BMW and any other suspicious cars or activity behind his store.  And the manager did.  Last Friday.

Mission Police Chief Leo Longoria Catches Alton Police Chief Baldemar Flores

 Last Friday, Mission Assistant Police Chief Martin Garza and Mission Police Chief Leo Longoria responded to the call from AutoZone, and saw things for themselves.  Ahem. 

The two officers then saw Chief Flores leave the AutoZone lot in a black Expedition, with the BMW following.  Mission Chief Longoria pulled over the BMW, and driver Cynthia Garcia told police that she had been in “an intimate relationship” with Police Chief Flores for three years (since 2006), and that they routinely met in cars behind the AutoZone and in other places ”for intimacy.”

What is Public Lewdness?

Public lewdness is a crime in Texas.  It involves having sex with another person (or animal or fowl) in a public place, or anywhere that is a reckless choice because of the likelihood that another person may be present who will be offended or alarmed.   Guess the parking lot of the AutoZone counts….

What’s Happening in Mission Now ….

Police Chief Flores is facing criminal charges.  The Alton City Manager has announced that the City of Alton will conduct its own investigation.  Flores is on leave without pay from his police job.  His wife (yes, he’s married) should still be getting a salary from her job at Rapid Security, Inc., a company that she and her husband founded — and Flores has told the media that he’ll be working there, too. 

Just an FYI … Flores replaced Jose Luis Vela as Alton Chief of Police after Vela was accused of sexually abusing male officers during drinking parties at his home — later, he was found not guilty of the charges.  Wow.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 4:50 pm

1 Comment
Labels: Cop Watch


September 9th, 2009

Judge Watch: Houston Judge Donald Jackson in Big Trouble – Suspended AND Indicted

While they are waiting for Judge Berchelmann’s findings in the Justice Keller matter, the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct isn’t taking a holiday … yesterday they suspended a Houston judge, with pay….

Houston Criminal County Court at Law Judge Donald Jackson Suspended with Pay, Already Under Indictment

The Judicial Commission has stopped Judge Jackson from taking the bench, but he’s still able to get his $140,000/year salary.  Meanwhile, the Houston Grand Jury has already heard evidence and an indictment has been issued against 59 year old Judge Donald Jackson, for the misdemeanor charge of official oppression. 

If he’s found guilty, Judge Jackson faces up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $4,000.  And, assumedly, the Commission might stop his salary at that point. 

What Did Judge Jackson Allegedly Do?

According to the Indictment, last February this criminal judge had before him a drunk driving case with a young, female defendant.  Allegedly, the judge “… offered to get the complainant a different attorney to get her case dismissed if she would be interested in the defendant [that's the judge, he's a "defendant" in the indictment language] and enter into a relationship with him that was more than a one night stand.” 

There’s more to the story, of course.  The Indictment also alleges that Judge Jackson made “unwelcome sexual advances,” as well as a “request for sexual favors, ” and engaged in “verbal conduct of a sexual nature.”

Are we asking too much to think that Judges should know better?

County Court at Law Judge Donald Jackson has presided over Harris County Court at Law No. 3 for SEVENTEEN years.  And, last February when all this purportedly took place, we had federal judge Samuel Kent facing his own sexual misconduct charges with the continuation of his January trial being all over the Houston media, much less the rest of the country.  

Did Judge Jackson not read the papers?  Did he never hear of avoiding even the “appearance of impropriety”?  Why was he even talking with a drunk driving defendant?  What’s going on here with the Houston-area judiciary? 

Kent’s serving time, let’s see what happens to Jackson as his case proceeds….

As we all know, Kent ended up circumventing a full trial and he’s serving time now.  We’ll see what happens to Judge Jackson.  Maybe he’s innocent.

Posted by Michael Lowe at 3:06 pm

1 Comment
Labels: Judge Watch


September 8th, 2009

Cop Watch: Refugio Chief of Police Indicted after Fed Investigation

The Federal Bureau 0f Investigation (FBI), together with the Texas Rangers, just keeps on its quiet tour of the State of Texas, bopping one law enforcement agency after another with criminal indictments.  They’re doing this so often, it’s almost like an adult and scary version of Little Bunny Foo-Foo in that forest with all the field mice ….

FBI and Texas Rangers Investigation Results in Felony Indictment of Refugio Chief of Police

Last Wednesday, the FBI and Texas Ranger team were down in Refugio, watching as the Grand Jury issued an indictment of the Chief of Police for Refugio, Texas (about 30 minutes north of Corpus) on charges of (1) felony theft by a public servant, (2) misapplication of fiduciary property and (3) three counts of abuse of official capacity.  Police Chief Chris Brock surrendered the next day and was released after posting $55,000 bond.

Chief Brock is accused of stealing somewhere between $20-100,000 from a police forfeiture account.  The investigation took about three years, and started with someone complaining to the Texas Rangers about the forfeiture monies (cash taken from criminals). 

Those Tempting Forfeiture Accounts

Forfeiture accounts appear to be very tempting for law enforcement … just this past June, we were posting about over $4,000,000 in drug forfeiture money that was missing from the Jim Wells County accounts and discovered to have been used by the old District Attorney on trips to Vegas and things. 

Geez, pondering all those millions missing from the Jim Wells County forfeiture account, it sorta sounds like Refugio Chief Brock wasn’t doing anything much more than hitting petty cash ….

Posted by Michael Lowe at 3:28 pm

No Comments
Labels: Cop Watch, Corrupt Cops