Constitutional Law

Followup on Maricopa County case

The case involving the deputy who read over and grabbed the defense attorney's papers gets stranger by the moment, even allowing that the county attorney up there and the sheriff are reputedly, well, nuts.

As noted earlier, the judge held the deputy in contempt. Now the county attorney has filed felony charges against the judge. On a quick read they are pretty strange. For one thing, they are quite ambiguous. The judge provided "money, transportation, weapon or disguise or other means of avoiding discovery, apprehension, prosecution of conviction" to any judges, officials, or attorneys (only two being named).

For another, look at the verification. "Subscribed and sworn upon information and belief this 9th day of December 2009" .... and there is no signature of a notary. Then it has the judge's home address.

BTW, the defendant is the chief criminal judge of the county.

At the end is the explanation. Cripes ... the judge apparently denied the county's motion to recuse himself, and county lost an appeal. Then he failed to hold someone in contempt that the county thought should be held in contempt. And he responded to claims that the sheriffs' office didn't have enough manpower to transport people to court for bail-setting hearings (meaning people remained in jail without necessity) by suggesting that if the number of inmates was reduced this would cease to be a problem.

I have trouble reading further. This suggests a remarkable assault on the judiciary by the executive branch. Rule our way or face prosecution! I hope the judge files a 1983 action and puts a few wingnuts in their place.

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on December 10, 2009 (boomark / email).