The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Maribel Jimenez, with
assistance from Magaly Del Rosario, a manager of Bella Beauty, administered deep
tissue buttock injections of substantial quantities of silicone, an adulterated
medical device when used and intended to be used in this manner, to hundreds of
Bella Beauty clients.
The silicone
which was unlawfully injected into Bella Beauty clients was clandestinely
smuggled into the United States by Jimenez and co-conspirators by means of
approximately 170 separate DHL air carrier shipments. To avoid the scrutiny
of Customs and Border Protection, upon importation into the United States, each
bottle contained false labelling stating in Spanish that the contents consisted
of “Depilatory Wax” and alleged instructions on how to apply this purported
rosin-based substance in a manner consistent with hair removal.
After the injections, Jimenez
had been informed by a number of Bella Beauty Spa clients that they were
experiencing adverse health related symptoms. Jimenez and Del Rosario
failed to advise the clients that silicone had been injected into their bodies.
The defendants also intentionally concealed the potential health consequences
arising from the injection of silicone into their clients’ bodies.
The email address that the government set up might be my favorite part:
Individual clients of Bella
Beauty Spa who have undergone buttocks injection procedures, regardless of how
far in the past, are urged to contact bellabeautyinjections@fda.hhs.gov
in order to receive additional information, address individual concerns, and to
receive information concerning their status and rights as potential victims.
Judge Dillard, who has a great Twitter feed @JudgeDillard, says yes in this interesting article:
One of the primary concerns often voiced by critics of judges using social media is that it is demeaning to the office. I do not consider this argument particularly persuasive. To be sure, a judge can demean his or her office through the use of social media, just as he or she can do so at a local bar event by engaging in unprofessional behavior. The difference is that an unprofessional remark on social media by a judge is far more likely to receive widespread attention than a similar comment made at an event in front of only a handful of people. Indeed, this type of “viral” incident can and will harm the reputation of that judge and, no doubt, the confidence that many have in the judiciary. Nevertheless, the fact that there is the potential for some judges to embarrass themselves on social media is not, in my view, a compelling reason to support a blanket ban of all judges doing so. One could even argue that there is some benefit to having the missteps of judges documented on social media, just as the missteps of other elected officials are documented. Transparency reveals what it reveals, and it is not always going to be pretty. But knowing more about our public officials’ actions and beliefs allows us to make informed decisions on Election Day. And that, in my view, is a good thing.
But what about Federal Judges? Should they be using social media? Some judges, like 7th Circuit Judge Posner, are prolific bloggers. Or at least used to be. I really enjoyed District Judge Kopf's blog, but that was shut down too. And now, of course, there's #appellatetwitter (see the law.com article here). You can guess my opinion... we need more interaction with the judiciary and social media is a good place for it. But it's hard to imagine some of our federal judges tweeting.
That's the Miami Herald headline from David Ovalle's article about the unique Miami connection to the Trump travel ban. Fun times:
In ruling against President Donald Trump’s “Muslim travel
ban,” a trio of federal judges relied in part on a distinctly South
Florida court case — one that granted religious protections for the
ritual sacrifice of chickens and goats.
The unanimous ruling Thursday night
upholding a halt to the White House executive order cited a famous 1993
U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned a Hialeah law banning
SanterÃa animal sacrifices. Justices found that the city ordinance
infringed on constitutionally protected freedoms.
Pablo Martinez MonsivaisAP
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit court made clear that judges can consider outside
statements made by elected leaders — in this case, President Donald
Trump himself — in trying to figure out if the intent of a government
action was to discriminate against a religious group.
“In
Hialeah in the 1990s, it was SanterÃa. With Trump, it’s Muslims,” said
University of Virginia law professor Douglas Laycock, an expert on
religious liberties who successfully argued the Hialeah case.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article131983429.html#storylink=cpy
1. Former Carnes clerk, former AUSA and current Circuit Judge Robert Luck was named today to the 3rd DCA. From the DBR:
In an earlier interview, Luck told the Daily Business Review that Carnes taught him "lawyers and judges, both orally and when we write, should speak in a way that the everyday person can understand."
During Luck's time at the U.S. Attorney's Office, he handled 19 jury trials — a rarity for a young lawyer. Luck secured a guilty plea in the largest student visa fraud to date. He also persuaded a court to impose a 20-year prison sentence on a doctor who ran a $50 million Medicare fraud scheme, and he got a guilty plea from a boat captain who tried to smuggle dozens of Dominicans into the U.S.
Luck became a circuit judge the first time he applied. In August's judicial election, he kept his seat in the circuit's criminal division by a margin of 53.5 percent to challenger Yolly Roberson's 46.5 percent.
2. Tonight is the big shindig for the Federal Bar Association at the Hyatt. It's the "36th Annual Federal Judicial Reception" from 5:30-8:30. Enjoy!
3. And tomorrow is the DCBA's Bench and Bar conference. Lots of interesting panels. They stuck mine during the lunch hour... I'll be moderating a panel at noon on "Trends in Criminal Law" with some great speakers including Judges Milton Hirsch and Nushin Sayfie, Federal Public Defender Michael Caruso, State Public Defender Carlos Martinez, State Attorney Kathy Fernandez Rundle, and U.S. Attorney Willy Ferrer.
That was Akin Gump lawyer and former prosecutor Jeffrey Wertkin after being arrested in disguise trying to sell a sealed complaint to an informer. Sad. From Bloomberg:
A Washington lawyer at a prominent firm was arrested in a disguise
while trying to sell a copy of a secret lawsuit involving a company that
was under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. Jeffrey Wertkin
was picked up Jan. 31 in the lobby of a hotel in Cupertino, California,
where he believed he was about to collect $310,000 for selling the
lawsuit, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Wertkin,
who worked in Washington for Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP,
believed he would hand a copy of a complaint to an employee of the
company, which was accused in the complaint by a whistle-blower of
falsely billing the government. Wertkin, who was wearing a wig and using
the name of Dan, was met instead by an FBI agent, according to arrest
documents unsealed on Feb. 6.