Home > Uncategorized > Yes, Virginia, Sometimes There IS Justice!

Yes, Virginia, Sometimes There IS Justice!

I have good news, and… good  news.

In the matter of

FELECIA AMOS

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

Not only was I right on all counts about what happened and the utter wrongitude of it—it is going up on appeal and the brief is masterfully written.

I am “in the loop” — hearing about developments–as a direct result of the previous blog post. (!)

Here are just a few excerpts:

“As a non-party Ms. Amos was, of course, not permitted to cross-examine either of these witnesses, to challenge the authenticity or completeness of the audio recording or to present any evidence. ..At the end of the hearing the court delivered “an uninterrupted monologue …” (I am picturing a rant. Another sign of the bias this reeked of.)

Apparently there was a sane judge on the (denied) appeal who dissented (bless him.) “Judge McCullough would have reversed on the grounds that a court cannot summarily punish a witness for giving allegedly false testimony. Id.at 12.”

And case law exists!!! Hallelujah!

“…Scialdone and Brandt rejected nearly identical arguments because, in those cases, as in this case, any factual finding of “calculated misuse of the judicial system” would necessarily be based on witness testimony, not the judge’s personal knowledge.”

As I say—AS IT SHOULD BE. Crikey. But happily some good lawyering is afoot here.

“If an attorney representing a party at a proceeding can be excused from objecting because a court’s action is unexpected it is difficult to see how the application of the rule would be different when a non-attorney, non-party is unexpectedly and summarily convicted of a crime….”

There’s more… Check this out:

“In response to Mr. Amos’s attorney’s concern that Ms. Amos might discover and be able to respond to this evidence, the court’s recommendation to counsel was explicit: ‘[d]on’t tell her.’”

So not only was Ms Amos “blindsided” (the appellate brief calls it an “ambush”—which it was) Husband, charmer that he was—is—went to considerable lengths to set the trap. (Are you tracking  the conspiracy here? Which, BTW, Felecia alleged?????)  And Gott sie danke, it seems case law in Virginia does not allow a judge to send someone off to jail based on THE JUDGE’S OPINION. Which is as it should be.

So,  the  first good news is, I was right when I smelled a rat and the OTHER good news is… This second appeal is to the court “en banc”—all the judges of the appellate panel, not just the one who is (in my HUMBLE opinion) “bent.

So, at some cost in dollars and anguish, Felecia Amos seems to be on track for some justice. Shout out to the Kaplan law firm.

Mr. Kaplan sir– kudos to you not only for your pursuit of  justice but for a stellar level of legal writing. Mazel tov.

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized Tags: ,
  1. Leslie (I'mKar'n23)
    August 24, 2012 at 3:43 am

    Good for you, Carroll! You are an advocate for the underdog – which is as it should be! lol..it’s scary – but not surprising – how the courts and the law can be twisted to the benefit of one party and the detriment of the other! Sex and money seem to play a major role. Keep up the good legal eagle work, C!

  2. Attorney
    October 23, 2012 at 9:27 pm

    Motion for Rehearing En Banc was granted by the Virginia Court of Appeals on October 23, 2012. See: http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/1667114.pdf

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: