- law dawg
- 36 Comments
- 3654 Views
- Judge Mary Kay Holthus completed the sentencing that was interrupted when man attacked her. [8NewsNow; RJ]
- Here is video with another angle before the attack for those curious. [8NewsNow]
- Culinary Union sets strike deadline for remaining contract negotiations. [KTNV]
- State AG wants Esmeralda County sheriff ousted. [RJ]
- Meng Zhong honored as pro bono attorney of the year by LACSN. [RJ]
Surprised Holthus went forward
Well, if there’s going to be a NCJC Rule 2.11 problem on the judge not recusing, it’s a completed act now. None of the media coverage linked above mentions whether the recusal issue was raised by either defense counsel or by the judge herself; I doubt the DA would’ve raised it.
Based on this, https://twitter.com/OyVegas/status/1744415757608636692, defense counsel didn’t request recusal or object to the judge proceeding. The lack of objection would mean the issue is probably waived for appeal , unless it constitutes clear error that affected the fundamental fairness of the proceeding, yes? And might it also lead to an ineffective assistance of counsel claim? I’d invite criminal practitioners to comment.
All of this is true – but, these are probably not great claims. Doesn’t stop them from being filed of course. Also the actual sentence length is so low postconviction relief would never conclude before he expires. Now on the new multi-count consecutive maxout sentences he is about to receive that’s a different story…
He has absolutely no defense whatsoever. And what, if anything, will he be able to say at sentencing? “I’m sorry” sure ain’t gonna cut it.
No. But, “I am crazy” might get it done . . . . .
Guy was in Lakes for long stretches over the last year and only was found competent in past few months.
I’ve thought about this as well. We can’t be sending a message that a (guilty) criminal defendant can get a new judge just by acting up in court. But on the other hand, I would think that she would want to make some sort of record to the effect that the sentence she is giving today on the underlying case is the exactly the same as the one she was preparing to pronounce at the point where she was so rudely interrupted.
She apparently did lay out some record. The R-J reports: “I want to make it clear that I am not changing or modifying the sentence I was imposing last week,” Holthus said.
Further to laying out a record against recusal, from the video the R-J has now posted with their story, the judge today admitted as a court exhibit her notes from the calendar sheet from the day of the incident, which she says reflects the sentence she had already decided to impose, before the incident occurred, from the moment she walked into court that day. She says nothing has been changed and it reflects the sentence she was already determined to impose.
So has she now potentially revealed a prejudgment issue, if she had already decided the sentence before hearing the allocution and argument on sentencing? Or will the explanation become words to the effect of, “I was leaning this way before hearing the allocution and argument, but I had heard enough before the incident to decide to go with my earlier inclination.”?
I thought the same thing. I’m not a crim guy, but when I was clerking my court vacated a sentence because the defendant inadvertently hadn’t had a chance to allocute. Now is having a predetermined sentence that could not possibly be changed by allocution tantamount to denying allocution? Probably not, but it seems worth raising in an appeal.
Unfortunately, no objection by his counsel to this either, so that too might also be waived.
As 12:53 pointed out, the appeal and post-conviction relief claims are probably not great, and not objecting very well could’ve been strategic decisions by defense counsel–e.g., it wouldn’t have changed the likely outcome, would’ve kept the defendant behind bars longer, etc.
Did anyone see the article in Law360 by Alexa Scherzinger on January 5, 2024 about a local DUI driver who apparently caused two deaths and is claiming GEICO forced him to take a $14 million settlement?
Well thanks for the link, homie.
Wut?
https://www.law360.com/insurance-authority/articles/1782489
But it’s behind a paywall.
Damn they are good. I have tried every method that I know and they still block it.
From Google search on similar words: “A drunken driver accused of causing two deaths claimed Geico failed to settle a wrongful death claim against him for a reasonable value, forcing him to take a $14 million settlement deal one day before trial, according to a suit removed to Nevada federal court.”
Pure speculation – but is this one where he stipulated to settlement with plaintiff, including a covenant that plaintiff would not execute on that judgment, and then he assigned his insurance bad faith claim to the plaintiff?
This way, Plaintiff can go after the deep pockets of the insurance company on the bad faith claim, rather than get a multimillion dollar judgment from this guy who is (likely) judgment proof.
That’s what typically happens when the carrier drops the ball on a policy limits demand in a case like this.
Can someone explain how he alleges they forced him to take it?
The EJDC case no. is !-23-875800-C. The removed case to District of Nevada is case 2:24-cv-00023-JCM-NJK.
Plaintiff is a POS, driving down Rainbow at 100+ mph while racing and with a BAC of 0.9, causing the deaths of two people. Dead Plaintiff’s counsel wanted to settle for the policy limits of $30k, and proof that plaintiff was dead-ass broke. Geico allegedly dithered, then sent a release (standard insurance boilershit, I’m sure) that said plaintiff agreed to defend and indemnify Geico. Dead Plaintiff’s counsel say ha ha no. Geico dithered, Dead Plaintiff’s counsel sued. Defendant never got independent counsel, despite asking for it, and Dead Plaintiff’s counsel moving for it.
After that, yeah, assignment of rights and covenant not to pursue.
Plaintiff being a POS, and Geico being a POS are not mutually exclusive.
This is a standard fair for bad faith litigation. I doubt that that “Dead Plaintiff’s counsel wanted to settle for the policy limits of $30k, and proof that plaintiff was dead-ass broke.”
But the Ins Cos, as a matter of practice are so quick to slow walk the payment that they miss the dead line and are on the hook to their insured for bad faith. Treble damages are going to be very heavy against GEICO for this double death DUI.
Hope they ring the bell against GEICO!
2:24-cv-00023-JCM-NJK
Removed from A-23-875800-C
The underlying case first amended complaint filed 12/4/23 in Clark County District A-23-875800-C. Interesting read.
Lewis Brisbois and Lewis Roca are also being sued for apparenlty refusing to turn over the DUI client’s file.
Good topic for the blog-when is defense counsel required to turnover the client’s file?
Original case: A-17-764364-C
What a cock-up by GEiCO
Why would Lewis Brisbois be sued when McCormick Barstow is defense counsel?
Not a criminal practitioner, but I thought Judge Holthus handled herself perfectly today. She finished the job interrupted by “the Defendant’s activities”. She didn’t get on a soapbox. She kept it simple and professional. The new charges and new case will address Redden’s conduct in court, she didn’t need to and she knew it. Also, Judge Holthus, I fucking love that you showed up to work the next day. Just like your law clerk Michael Lasso, you are a badass and sent a message to the public that the administration of justice marches forward and stops for no one.
“Redden’s foster mother and sister both spoke to reporters after Monday’s hearing. They confirmed Redden suffers from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and questioned whether sending him back to prison would help him.”
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/courts/sentencing-moves-forward-for-man-who-attacked-judge-2977977/?utm_campaign=widget&utm_medium=most_read&utm_source=homepage&utm_term=Sentencing%20moves%20forward%20for%20man%20who%20attacked%20judge
Karen Springer, you are a saint. You have no continuing formal familial or legal obligation to Redden, and yet there you are demonstrating the kind of loyalty and support that every person deserves in their darkest hour. That is what family is all about. Ride or die.
Did anyone listen to to the arguments Redden and his lawyer made as their basis for probation? The entire time was spent telling J. Holthus that Redden was now sane and recovered and turning over a new leaf. This was just minutes before he did the shit he did.
But now it wasn’t criminal intent, but rather schizophrenia and bipolar disorder? You can’t have it both ways.
Dude is an ongoing violent dangerous asshole. Keep him locked up until he’s too old and decrepit to hurt anyone.
Or, he “superman’s” the wrong dude, inside.
2:46 PM here. I didn’t say that Redden isn’t violent and dangerous or that he should be excused because of alleged schizophrenia or some other mental condition. His foster mom brought up the latter. I didn’t say it was a good argument. I did say it’s good that there is someone there for him in his darkest hour acting as his advocate and remaining loyal to him. She is probably all that he has in this world. She isn’t making a legal argument before the judge, she is telling his story to the media as she sees it and has experienced it. She doesn’t have an obligation to be consistent with what he has said in court. She’s just there for him, which is beautiful and commendable.
lock him up, throw away the key. unredeemable protoplasm.