Wow, did he do anything to PO the judge other than this campaign for the pardon by his supporters. Maybe the judge thinks he has access to funds through his supporters. Have they started a legal defense fund? It may be time to start if one hasn't started yet. I have mentioned this on prior threads.
I have no idea if Cardone is PO'd and I don't know anything about her. I've pulled most all of the docs available on Pacer, and looked pretty closely at the docket. This judge cut no slack for the defense from day one. Defense motion, motion, motion... deny, deny, deny. Prosecution motion to exclude, motion to seal, motion to in limine.... grant, grant, grant. With so many sealed proceedings and docs, it's hard to tell what the heck is going on.
As to legal defense fund, see below:
(snip -- headers, etc.)
MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Comes now Ignacio Ramos, Jr., by and through his undersigned attorney, and moves this Court to grant this motion and find Defendant to be indigent and allow him to proceed in forma pauperis in this appeal, and would show the Court the following: I.
Mr. Ramos' financial status is set out in the presentence report which the Court reviewed. His financial condition has not improved since that time. He is without sufficient funds to pay for the transcript in this case or retain counsel for appeal. The undersigned attorney and co-counsel Mr. Peters were retained for purposes of representation in the district court only. At this point in time, counsel remain in the case on a pro bono basis.
At this time, Mr. Ramos is not requesting court-appointed counsel. He is aware that funds have been raised for the purposes of his legal defense. To date, he has not received any funds for legal fees or expenses. However, he understands that he will receive funds to assist with the retention of appellate counsel. It does not appear that there are sufficient funds raised to pay appellate counsel in full or cover expenses.
Mr. Ramos needs to file his transcript order for the purposes of perfecting his appeal. At this time he has no access to any funds raised on his behalf. However, Mr. Ramos expects to receive financial assistance with attorney's fees. In the event that he does not, he will approach the Court again and request the appointment of counsel.
Counsel has been informed that the United States Attorney has ordered the entire transcript in this case. However, Mr. Ramos does not even have sufficient funds to pay the copy cost for the transcript of all proceedings.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that this Court grant this motion, and allow Mr. Ramos to proceed in this appeal in forma pauperis, without payment of costs, including the transcript.
(snip... Signatures, etc. )
posted on 02/10/2007 11:38:07 AM PST
("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
To: calcowgirl; Kenny Bunk
It looks like a typical motion of this type. I'm a little surprised that the judge denied it. I have been involved in cases where the judge seems to be be totally against your client and it can be very disheartening. Hopefully the agents and the attorneys don't get too down. If there is a silver lining to the trial judges rulings against the defendants, it is that every ruling, whether on the motions or evidential, can be a ground for reversal on the appeal. Obviously if the judge grants your motion then it not a point for appeal whereas if the judge denies the motion that is one more point of error for the appellate court to consider. I have cases where the trial judge goes so overboard for one side that he creates reversible error for the case. Sometimes one error may not be enough for a reversal of the case but when there are several, the cumulative effect on the appellate judges can be helpful. As I said on another thread, trying to figure out what an appellate court will do is akin to reading tea leaves.
posted on 02/10/2007 3:45:42 PM PST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson