I think the announcement that Judge Blake is the incoming Chair of the Defender Services Committee is great news for us. She will be a tremendous advocate for our Program. For years, she has been a great supporter of our Office and our District’s Criminal Justice Act panel lawyers in Maryland. In her time on the Defender Services Committee, especially in her role as Chair of the Defender Services Budget Subcommittee, she has been a strong advocate for necessary funding for our office budgets and “mega cases”, including capital cases like Loughner. Recently, she led our District’s opposition to a proposal from the Circuit’s Chief Judge that there be presumptive caps on attorney’s fees in all capital cases.

Judge Blake reminds me a little bit of Judge Gleeson. Judge Gleeson and Judge Blake devoted most of their careers to serving as prosecutors. Yet, both seem to have a deep understanding of the important role we serve and our need for independence. She’s very thoughtful and always well-prepared.

These are challenging times. I go through life preparing for the worst. But I think this is encouraging news.

Dear Defenders and CJA Panel Attorneys,

As announced earlier this year, a contract for an Evidence Review Platform (ERP) for the Defender Services program was awarded to EC America, a
subsidiary of immixGroup, Inc., in partnership with AccessData (see January 13, 2012 announcement). AccessData is a nationally-renowned company in the areas of litigation support and computer forensics and they host AD CaseVantage, their secure Internet database review tool for case data and e-discovery.

We are pleased to announce that for CJA panel attorneys and federal defender offices, space is available on the web-hosted version of Summation, CaseVantage, for select cases. If approved, some or all case materials can be hosted on the CaseVantage platform for free, with a discounted rate available for larger cases needing to host additional data. Using a secure, legal review web-hosted platform such as CaseVantage is advantageous for multi-defendant cases with large volumes of information so that case materials are located in one central repository and easily reviewed, tagged and accessed by all defense teams from wherever they are as long as they have an internet connection. This greatly alleviates the need for panel attorneys to have specific hardware, software or IT support usually necessary to utilize similar Evidence Review Platforms on your local office network, and it allows defense teams to capture, organize, analyze, and review case-related electronic data. Along with the hosted space, AccessData provides project management expertise and training for
all users of the system.

Please note that legal review software platforms such as CaseVantage differ from online storage services such as Dropbox or Box.net. Those services are built for cloud storage and sharing of files, whereas CaseVantage is a tool designed for legal work. Its online database links to the case data which allows you, among other things, to keep private notes about the case data; bulk tag, filter, annotate and code information about the files which you can share with others on your defense team; review the electronic data without changing the underlying background information about them; and open and view many computer file types even if you don?t have the underlying software on your computer (e.g. you would not need to have Microsoft Excel to view an XLS spreadsheet).

In order to assess whether your particular case qualifies for free, secure hosted space, please do the following:

1. Have an attorney on the case contact the National Litigation Support Team at 510-637-3500 to discuss the particulars about the material you wish to have hosted. Make sure to identify whether the local federal defender office is involved as well and whether or not there are any retained counsel. Consider whether any of the discovery should not be web-hosted, even on a secure platform, due to its confidential or sensitive nature (see the Recommendations for ESI Discovery Production in Federal Criminal Cases at http://www.fd.org/odstb_esi.htm for further guidance regarding ESI security concerns). To assist you prior to your call, it may help you to review the “Initial Discovery and 3rd Party Data Assessment Checklist” on fd.org (here is the link) as these are some of the questions we will ask you in order to determine the volume and the technical nature of the data that you are seeking to host.

2. Schedule a demonstration of CaseVantage for all parties with Brooke Oppenheimer our designated project manager at AccessData to ensure that the web-hosted service fits your need. Please submit your request in writing to FPD_CJA_services@AccessData.com. This special email address has been set up to draw her attention to your request and to facilitate tracking for AccessData.

3. Discuss the option of using CaseVantage with all defense teams and identify any parties who do not wish to participate and have access to the
document platform.

Hosted space will be prioritized in the order that granted requests are received. Space is limited and this is a service for all CJA panel and FDO attorneys, so we cannot guarantee that there will be space available for every case. If space is not available, AccessData will provide a reduced rate for CJA panel attorneys and FDOs.

Please do not hesitate to contact either Kelly Scribner (kelly_scribner@fd.org), Alex Roberts (alex_roberts@fd.org) or Sean Broderick (sean_broderick@fd.org) at 510-637-3500 if you have any questions or need further clarification.

As I mentioned to you in my March 15th memo, NACDL is aware of the financial difficulties many are still experiencing as a result of the recession. NACDL also understands that increasingly panel attorneys and federal defenders are handling white collar cases. NACDL’s 2nd Annual West Coast White Collar Conference is scheduled for June 7 – June 8 in Lake Tahoe. The program is entitled “Turning the Tables on the Government.” The agenda and faculty are described below.

NACDL has committed significant scholarship resources in order to cover the registration costs for those who would not otherwise be able to attend. There are still several full and partial scholarships available. If you or any of your panel colleagues are interested, links to register are available below. You may also contact me directly if you have an interest in sending several panel members.

Here are the links and an overall description of the program:

Agenda: http://www.nacdl.org/LegalEducation.aspx?id=23244

Faculty: http://www.nacdl.org/LegalEducation.aspx?id=23245

Scholarships: http://www.nacdl.org/LegalEducation.aspx?id=23248

Registration: http://www.nacdl.org/LegalEducation.aspx?id=23247

Featured Topics will include:

• It’s All In Your Head: Defending on the Battlefield of Intent
• In the Driver’s Seat: Setting the Course for Negotiations With the Government
• The Professional Edge: Working With (and Against) Experts
• Detention, Discipline and Designation: Defense Strategies for Sentencing and Incarceration

Special Events:

• White Collar Supreme Court Review Lunch with Prof. Pam Karlan of Stanford Law School

As you all know, we recently lost an extremely committed member of our community with the passing of Andrea Taylor. Many of you have been in contact with me to ask about where donations could be made in Andrea’s honor, and I now have information on that subject.

In Andrea’s memory, and as appropriate given her devotion to her family, education funds have been set up for her two sons, Imani and Jabobi (Jake), with their loving father, Vincent Haskell, as the trustee. It is anticipated that the funds will be used for school and enrichment expenses, such as summer camps, and school tuition and expenses through college. Should the opportunity arise and sufficient funds be available, they might also be used for study or travel abroad, given, as Vincent said, “Andrea’s desire to raise the children as citizens of the world . . . .” The account information is as follows:

Citibank, N.A.
5250 MacArthur Blvd. NW
Washington DC 20016

Routing Number: 254070116

Account Number: 6786224490 (Imani Haskell)

Account Number: 6786224504 (Jake Haskell)

Please pass this information on to others in your offices or on your CJA panel who might wish to contribute in Andrea’s memory.

On behalf of Vincent and the boys, thank you all for your generosity.

Bob

At oral argument, the petitioners framed the issue as follows:

Why would Congress want district courts to continue to impose sentenced that were universally viewed as unfair and racially discriminatory?

I hope that my impression is wrong, but the Court’s questions did not to seem to side with petitioners. None of the justices seemed to go along with the notion that Congress views the former mandatory minimums and “unfair and racially discriminatory,” although Sotomayor and Kagan suggested that Congress wanted to right a previous wrong by the new law. The Court seemed to get bogged down on the proper standard. Petitioners argued that the test is whether the FSA provides the “fair implication” that Congress wanted the law to apply to cases that were in the pipeline even if the conduct that gave rise to the charge occurred before the FSA became law. Justice Scalia suggested that there must be a “clear and unquestionable implication” of such intent. Scalia indicated that the Court’s references to “fair implication” were merely dictum. Justice Ginsburg seemed to side with Scalia, noting that in the cases where the Court used the phrase “fair implication” the Court declined to apply the new law to cases in the pipeline. No one else jumped in to defend the “fair implication” standard. I think that the standard makes a big difference. A “fair implication” in favor of the petitioners is much easier to find than a “clear and unquestionable” one.

Stone involved a federal prosecution in Detroit. The defendants, who lived between 75 and 115 miles from the federal courthouse in Detroit, were represented under the CJA. They were scheduled to appear for a 6-8 week trial, but had no place to stay in the Detroit area. Counsel moved the court to pay for their lodging expenses with CJA funds. The district judge denied the motion, but found another way to pay for the lodging expenses under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3154(4). She also surveyed the various options for paying lodging expenses in this situation, which are worth considering.

One option to fund lodging for an indigent defendant is the CJA. That is the route the district courts took United States v. Mendoza, 734 F.Supp.2d 281 (E.D.N.Y.2010). In Mendoza, the district court paid for lodging for out-of-state defendants pursuant to the CJA provision that counsel may obtain compensation for “investigative, expert, or other services necessary for adequate representation.” The need for a hotel for an out-of state defendant during trial was considered “other services necessary for adequate representation.”

Another possible option for lodging expenses is to move the court to order the US Marshal to pay for it under 18 U.S.C. sec. 4285, which permits the court to order the Marshal to pay for transportation and “subsistence expenses” for indigent defendants in connection with required court appearances.

Another option, and the option that the Stone Court took, is to pay for lodging through pretrial services at a Community Corrections Center. Title 18, U.S.C. sec. 3154(4), does permit pretrial services to expend funds to ensure that defendants released on bond appear in court as required. In Stone, the court found that the limitations on liberty imposed by the halfway house were no greater than the bond conditions. In some cases, however, the limitations on liberty imposed by the halfway house could be a problem.

Ultimately in Stone, the court put it back on the defendants, holding that they may either accept the halfway house or drive to and from court each day.

The Law and Technology Electronic Courtroom Presentation Workshop focuses on the use of modern technology to improve the persuasiveness of courtroom presentations and receives excellent evaluations each time it is presented. This workshop is an intensive program where participants will learn to use TrialDirector and PowerPoint products to sharpen their courtroom skills. Attendees will enhance their direct-examination, cross-examination, and opening/closing argument abilities with detailed application and use of these litigation tools. Today, many federal courtrooms are “wired” to accommodate the latest computer programs, and this technology has proven to be an effective and persuasive addition to lawyers’ arsenals. Participation in the Law and Technology Workshop is particularly valuable for federal criminal defense attorneys.

General presentations and demonstrations are supplemented by concentrated small group workshops. In the smaller breakout groups, attendees receive hands-on guidance to apply the information presented in the plenary sessions using facts from a mock case file. Each participant will practice direct and cross-examination, and opening/closing arguments, using Trial Director and PowerPoint software.

In order to take full advantage of the hands-on learning opportunities provided at this program, we strongly recommend that you bring a Windows laptop (not a Macintosh). NOTE: If you solely use a Macintosh, you must have a “virtual Windows” program installed and ready for use (virtual Windows programs can run a copy of MS Windows on a Macintosh).

For information on the logistics, please contact Shemiah Schuler at Shemiah_Schuler@ao.uscourts.gov. For information about the substance of the program, please contact Stephen Marley at Stephen_Marley@ao.uscourts.gov.

TIME:
9:00 – 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time

PRESENTATIONAL FORMAT:
A 90-minute online video seminar addressing key defense strategies and risks associated with defending high-profile corporate criminal prosecutions in federal court. The program will be comprised of individual presentations and a moderated panel discussion, followed by an online Question / Answer session with attendees.

Each panelist will speak for approximately twenty minutes with an outline displayed on a viewing screen. The outlines will be made available to attendees to download as a handout.

As a courtesy to the bar, attendance is free to all. To attend this webcast, go to the AFDA home page (www.afda.org) on the date of the program and click on the link to enter the video viewing area.

Please be sure to have your AFDA member Username / Password handy. You will need them to log into the seminar.

Chicago location:
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
219 S. Dearborn, Chicago, IL
Court Room 2319

Madison location:
U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin
120 N. Henry Street, Madison, WI
Courtroom 250

This seminar is free, but space is limited. Please confirm your attendance by contacting Debbie Groboski at dgroboski@ag-ltd.com or (312) 692-2636.

Topics include:
Strengthening your career through pro bono
Earning the trust of your pro bono client
Marketing your pro bono experience within the firm and beyond
Preparing your client for settlement or trial
Meeting the court’s expectations

Opening Remarks:

Hon. James F. Holderman, Chief Judge, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
3:00 – 4:00 p.m, Chicago (with live, interactive, broadcast to Madison)
Hon. Virginia M. Kendall, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
David R. Askew, Director of the Pro Bono Program, Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
Marc R. Kadish, Director of Pro Bono Activities/Litigation Training, Mayer Brown LLP
Benjamin C. Weinberg, Pro Bono Partner, SNR Denton

Moderator: Margot Klein, Law Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Local Break-out Sessions:
4:00 – 5:00 p.m., Chicago
Hon. Robert M. Dow, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Donald J. Wall, Counsel to the Circuit Executive, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
Mara Block, Pro Bono Project Staff Attorney, Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago
J. Cunyon Gordon, Director of the Settlement Assistance Project, Chicago Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Inc.
Ashley M. Schumacher, Associate, Jenner & Block LLP
Brent D. Stratton, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Illinois Attorney General’s Office
Moderator: Julie E. LaEace, Pro Bono Manager, Kirkland & Ellis LLP

4:00 – 5:00 p.m., Madison
Hon. William M. Conley, Chief Judge, US. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin
Joshua Fredericks, Pro Se Law Clerk, US. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin
Corey F. Finkelmeyer, Assistant Attorney General and Director, Civil Litigation Unit, Wisconsin Department of Justice
David E. Jones, Partner, Perkins Coie LLP
Francis X. Sullivan, Assistant Attorney General, Wisconsin Department of Justice
Moderator: Freya K. Bowen, Associate, Perkins Coie LLP

Illinois and Wisconsin CLE credit pending: one hour ethics; one hour general.