presumably, mr. robbins will have
to wait until monday, at the earliest,
to secure a transcript of the june 14,
2007 hearing before judge walton — and
he absolutely needs that, in order to
file his emergency relief motion — so,
while we wait on his filing. . .
neat! — this appears to be mr. robbins’
latest criminal appeal, filed on behalf
of an individual convict, in the d.c. court
of appeals — and yes, he is an abramoff
scandal figure, convicted of obstructing
an OIG inquiry, among other things. where
he and scooter libby part company, is that he
is presently free on a bond, while his appeals
are pending. so, the d.c. circuit court of
appeals briefing schedule order, in green,
below [click to enlarge], presumably does
not represent a schedule where briefing has
been expedited. . .
and, still, it gives
one the sense that scoots
has quite a row yet to
hoe. . . note that
the final brief isn’t due
until very late august,
and only after that,
presumbaly about 50 days
later, will any argument
be heard. . . and only
after that, will any appellate order issue. . .
now — just for grins, let us assume that
scooter will be granted expedited review, here,
by the d.c. circuit. do remember that it takes “two,
to tango” — that is, the one potential
schedule conflict the d.c. circuit court of appeals
will no doubt respect, will be mr. patrick j.
fitzgerald’s (mr. robbins’ counterpart) ongoing criminal trials, over in chicago.
now, mr. fitzgerald is presently a rather busy prosecutor, in chicago, with the conrad black case, and its related off-shoots. . . so, it is not as though he could
just pop across the hall-way for some post-sentencing arguments in libby’s case.
no, even the presumably-expedited calendar in d.c. will
need to yield to an ongoing trial calendar in the u.s.
district court for the northern district of illinois,
eastern division. . . given the magnitude of that matter.
[so, back in moments with the forward-
docket from the conrad black case. . .]
yikes! — the black case is just now
reaching the point where various parties
in interest fight over proposed instructions
to the jury — that is, the matter is still quite
actively “on trial”, and a closing arguments
date-range is not yet docketed — take a look:
06/13/2007 — MOTION by Conrad M Black for acquittal Motion to Dismiss or Strike and Renewed Motion for Severance at the Close of the Defense Case and at the Close of All the Evidence (Martin, Marc) (Entered: 06/13/2007)
06/13/2007 — Defendant Black’s Supplemental Jury Instruction With Respect to Counts Ten, Eleven and Twelve by Conrad M Black (Martin, Marc) (Entered: 06/13/2007)
06/13/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve as to F David Radler, Mark S Kipnis, Ravelston Corporation Limited, The, Conrad M Black, John A Boultbee, Peter Y Atkinson: The Court sustains Defendants’ objection to Government Instruction No. 60-A. The Court will not give this instruction.Mailed notice (yap, ) (Entered: 06/14/2007)
06/14/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve : The Court overrules Defendants objections to Government Instruction No. 63. Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/14/2007)
06/14/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve : The Court sustains the government’s objections to Black Supplemental Count 10-12 Instruction B. The Court will give the attached instruction. Further, the Court sustains the government’s objection to the language in Instruction C — “Omissions or misstatements in SEC filings that are minor, or meaningless, or unimportant do not constitute ‘material’ misstatements or omissions” — as argumentative Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/14/2007)
06/14/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve : Hearing on Defendant Kipnis’ motion in limine Motion To Preclude Closing Argument on Certain Topics and motion to strike Other Acts Evidence is set for 6/15/2007 at 11:30 AM. Telephone notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/14/2007)
06/15/2007 — NOTICE of Correction regarding miscellaneous remark751 as to F David Radler, Mark S Kipnis, Ravelston Corporation Limited, The, Conrad M Black, John A Boultbee, Peter Y Atkinson. Document number 751 was filed using the incorrect event. The document must be re-filed as a motion. (rbf, ) (Entered: 06/15/2007)
06/15/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve : Defendants’ Motion to Give Supplemental Instruction 63 B is granted. (R. 751-1). Although it is not the pattern instruction, it is an accurate statement of the law. See United States v. Carrillo, 435 F.3d 767, 780-81 (7th Cir. 2006). Mailed notice (jms, ) (Entered: 06/15/2007)
06/15/2007 — MINUTE entry before Judge Amy J. St. Eve : as to Mark S Kipnis (5): Defendant’s motion in limine to preclude closing argument on certain topics  is granted in part and denied in part and denied in part as moot for the reasons stated in open court. Defendant’s motion to strike other acts evidence  is denied in light of the court’s other rulings. Advised in open court (jms, ) (Entered: 06/15/2007)
06/15/2007 — MOTION by Mark S Kipnis, Conrad M Black, John A Boultbee, Peter Y Atkinson to Give Supplemental Instruction 63 B (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Martin, Marc) (Entered: 06/15/2007). . .
and on and on it will go — perhaps for
another three to four weeks, even, before
closing argumnets in black begin. . .
erh — camp fed, for scoots? i think so.