Archive for the ‘DA Watch’ Category

March 9th, 2009

DA Watch: Harris County DA Hires Lobbyist for Rest of Texas Legislative Session

Now, here’s something to ponder over … district attorneys (elected officials) hiring private, third-party lobbists to lobby for them with lawmakers (other elected officials).

So, the lawmakers don’t just check with the DAs on the repercussions of changing the Penal Code as part of their job?

Apparently NOT.

Over in Houston, the District Attorney has taken $17,000 out of the Hot Checks division and used it to pay for a lobbyist.

That’s right: a lobbyist. This guy, Hank Mitchell, is being paid by the Harris County District Attorney to lobby the Texas Legislature on behalf of the DA.

For how long? Through the end of the current legislative session.

About what? according to the Houston Chronicle, Mr. Mitchell’s job is to “ensure lawmakers have a Houston prosecutor’s perspective on possible changes to the penal code and other criminal justice laws.”

And, before you start scratching your head, you might like to know that this isn’t the first time this has been done.

Up in Vegas last summer, there was a big deal about a lobbyist name Rick Loop upping his fee from $80,000 to $150,000 to represent Distict and Justice Court judges before the Nevada legislature during its 2009 legislative session. The media brouhaha wasn’t over the fact that the judges were hiring the lobbyist, the brouhaha was over his price hike. Vegas, right.

Awhile back, someone thought there might be an ethical issue here. At least San Antonio DA Susan Reed did.

Back in 1999, the District Attorney for Bexar County, then and now Susan Reed, requested and got an Opinion from the Attorney General of the State of Texas, who was then John Cornyn, asking if a county could use public funds to hire a lobbyist to influence legislation. Cornyn said yes.

Here’s the link to that AG Opinion if you want to read it:
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/pdf/JC0089.pdf.

Source:

Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6292221.html

Las Vegas Sun
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jun/29/same-lobbyist-courts-shorter-term-more-money/

February 11th, 2009

DA Watch: Brazoria County DA Holds Back Release of Hot XXX Stuff Found On Judge’s PC

There’s always a story when a judge quits his job, and this time was no different.

Back on August 29th, Brazoria County Court at Law Place 3 Judge James Blackstock resigned his bench and pled “no contest” to charges of official oppression and assault of five different women.

Allegations Involved Touching, Kissing, and Lewd Computer Stuff

Judge Blackstock had been accused of touching, kissing, and sending lewd pix via email to these five female employees of Brazoria County. There were apparently some text messages, too, and all this totalled to 14 official oppression charges against the Judge.

That’s a pretty big story right there, but that’s not the end of it.

Up in Travis County, another lawsuit has been filed – this time by Brazoria County District Attorney Jeri Yenne, asking for the court’s decision on what should be done with the data stored on Judge Blackstock’s computer per the Texas Open Records Act.

Seems the Brazoria County publication, The Facts (http://thefacts.com) and an attorney for two of the female employees are asking for this XXX stuff.

Brazoria County DA Wants A Second Opinion Before She Releases XXX Computer Data

DA Yenne already has the Attorney General’s opinion. The Attorney General of the State of Texas says fork the stuff over. That’s not enough for DA Yenne.

Instead, DA Yenne has gone to a Travis County Judge asking that judge to weigh in — why?

According to a quote in TheFacts, Yenne says that the stuff is obscenity, and that she feels the Texas Penal Code against transmitting obscenity trumps whether or not a request is valid under the Open Records Act.

Interesting to ponder: Open Records Access vs. Obscenity Laws.

And while this Travis County Judge gets down to business on making that ruling, there’s still more happening here.

Seems the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is checking into this stuff, too, and a federal court judge already issued a subpoena on the EEOC’s behalf last September. The feds got their hands on the XXX Computer Data months ago.

That must be some Hot XXX Stuff on Judge Blackstock’s hard drive, right?

Source:

TheFacts.Com
http://thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=6d05febb4fbce278

January 26th, 2009

DA Watch: Tarrant County DA Tosses Hot Potato to Texas AG in Toney Case

Well, well, well. Seems the District Attorney’s Office over in Fort Worth isn’t going to make the call in the Michael Toney case. They’ve just recused themselves, and now the decision about what to do with Michael Toney is on the Attorney General’s desk.

Who’s Michael Toney? Why is this case a hot potato?

Back in October 2008, we had a lengthy post here (link below) about Michael Toney with all the backstory details. Suffice to say, it was his case where the Tarrant County DA held back important evidence — evidence that could have saved Mr. Toney from a murder conviction and Death Row.

Yep. Michael Toney has been setting on Death Row since 1999, while dust gathered on key evidence over there in the Tarrant County DA’s offices.

What was held back?

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.)

When will the trial decision be made?

There’s no deadline – but Toney’s attorneys could move the court to set one.

What’s being said?

According to the Star-Telegram, Tarrant County says this was the “appropriate thing to do,” and the AG didn’t say anything (telling the media they didn’t have enough info yet).

Toney’s got some really big guns fighting for him: over in San Francisco, Colleen Kennedy of O’Melvany & Myers spoke on Toney’s behalf and agreed that the recusal was “appropriate.”

The victim’s family has been quoted as believing Toney is guilty, but wanting to make sure he gets a fair trial.

What’s the kicker?

It may just be the appropriate thing to do for Tarrant County to get this case out of its offices after it’s uncontested that this important evidence sat there — stuff that could have freed a man from Death Row.

However, it’s curious, too.

If there’s not enough evidence – once it’s all spread out on the table – for there to be a retrial of Michael Toney, then that’s gonna be decided and announced from the AG’s Office, not Tarrant County. And from the press reports, you gotta wonder what’s left on the State’s side to demonstrate guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at this juncture.

So, if the decision is made not to re-try Toney, then what’s up his fancy California law firm’s sleeve? Does anyone wonder about the civil lawsuit that might be waiting in the wings?

That’s possibly a big case: after all, he’s been setting on Death Row for all this time, stalwarting claiming that he is innocent of that bombing.

Is this is a case that the AG’s getting ready for? Just something to ponder. Cha-ching.

Source:

Fort Worth Star Telegram
http://www.star-telegram.com/arlington_news/story/1160442.html

Dallas Criminal Lawyer Blog
http://dallaslawyer.blogspot.com/2008/10/da-watch-tarrant-county-das-office-held.html