Judge Canon's ready to kill the documents case against 45

[Lemon Drop]

"Judge Cannon has YET TO SCHEDULE the following motions

* Motion to Dismiss based on Presidential Immunity
* Motion to Dismiss based on Selective and Vindictive Prosecution
* Motion to Dismiss based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith
* Motion to Suppress evidence seized during the execution of the search warrant at MAL"

From Katie Phang of NBC

"This is incredibly important because if Cannon succeeds in holding any of the dispositive motions until after trial starts, she could grant them after the jury is empaneled & double jeopardy attaches, ending the case with no possibility of appeal for the prosecution."

From Attny. Joyce Vance of MSNBC via twitter

[Ombligo]

It is what I predicted several months ago. I'm just surprised she has pushed the trial to start already in order to dismiss it.

[samintx]

Brilliant legal mind :confused:

[special]

Lemon Drop wrote:
"Judge Cannon has YET TO SCHEDULE the following motions

* Motion to Dismiss based on Presidential Immunity
* Motion to Dismiss based on Selective and Vindictive Prosecution
* Motion to Dismiss based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith
* Motion to Suppress evidence seized during the execution of the search warrant at MAL"

From Katie Phang of NBC

"This is incredibly important because if Cannon succeeds in holding any of the dispositive motions until after trial starts, she could grant them after the jury is empaneled & double jeopardy attaches, ending the case with no possibility of appeal for the prosecution."

From Attny. Joyce Vance of MSNBC via twitter

There should be something in the constitution to prevent abuse like this.

[Ted King]

special wrote:

There should be something in the constitution to prevent abuse like this.

It's very rare for appeals courts to approve them, but Smith could file a writ of mandamus (as defined by the 11th Circuit Court that oversees Cannon):

Mandamus is available “only in drastic situations, when no other adequate means are available to remedy a clear usurpation of power or abuse of discretion.” Jackson v. Motel 6 Multipurpose, Inc., 130 F.3d 999, 1004 (11th Cir. 1997). For a writ of mandamus to issue, three conditions must be met: first, the party seeking the writ must have no other adequate means of relief; second, the petitioner must demonstrate his or her right to the writ is clear and indisputable;
and third, the issuing court must determine whether a writ is appropriate under the circumstances.

From what I can gather Smith seems to be trying to force Cannon into making a ruling that is so absurd that the 11th Circuit Appeals Court would be more likely to grant him a writ of mandamus but Cannon is stalling on making any rulings until after the trial starts because then if (when) she let him off the hook he couldn't be tried again because of double jeopardy.

As it says above, getting a writ of mandamus is very rare and I'm sure even rarer for such a writ to be successful at having a judge removed from a case, but this all is so egregious that Smith may even try to do a writ of mandamus based on Cannon refusing to rule on motions that he deems essential.

[bfd]

She may see the handwriting on the wall: …anas mortuus es

[special]

If one of these motions happens after the trial starts, does double jeopardy really apply?
My understanding is double jeopardy applies when you were found not guilty. But if it’s a mistrial for example, or hanged jury, I believe that you can be tried again. Does double jeopardy apply when there is no clear verdict?

[Ted King]

special wrote:
If one of these motions happens after the trial starts, does double jeopardy really apply?
My understanding is double jeopardy applies when you were found not guilty. But if it’s a mistrial for example, or hanged jury, I believe that you can be tried again. Does double jeopardy apply when there is no clear verdict?

https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/crimina...plies.html

Double jeopardy attaches at different times depending on the type of criminal trial. In a jury trial, it typically attaches when the court swears in the jurors. In a bench trial, it attaches when the court swears in the first witness to testify.

Once double jeopardy attaches, the government typically cannot call for a second prosecution of a criminal defendant for the same criminal offense.

Cannon delaying rulings until after the jury is sworn in means that after that Trump can't be tried again for the same thing even if she makes rulings that are ridiculous by law - THAT is what Smith wants to avoid at all costs given the obvious horrible bias of Cannon toward Trump.

[N-OS X-tasy!]

Ted King wrote:
[quote=special]

There should be something in the constitution to prevent abuse like this.

It's very rare for appeals courts to approve them, but Smith could file a writ of mandamus (as defined by the 11th Circuit Court that oversees Cannon):

Mandamus is available “only in drastic situations, when no other adequate means are available to remedy a clear usurpation of power or abuse of discretion.” Jackson v. Motel 6 Multipurpose, Inc., 130 F.3d 999, 1004 (11th Cir. 1997). For a writ of mandamus to issue, three conditions must be met: first, the party seeking the writ must have no other adequate means of relief; second, the petitioner must demonstrate his or her right to the writ is clear and indisputable;
and third, the issuing court must determine whether a writ is appropriate under the circumstances.

From what I can gather Smith seems to be trying to force Cannon into making a ruling that is so absurd that the 11th Circuit Appeals Court would be more likely to grant him a writ of mandamus but Cannon is stalling on making any rulings until after the trial starts because then if (when) she let him off the hook he couldn't be tried again because of double jeopardy.

As it says above, getting a writ of mandamus is very rare and I'm sure even rarer for such a writ to be successful at having a judge removed from a case, but this all is so egregious that Smith may even try to do a writ of mandamus based on Cannon refusing to rule on motions that he deems essential.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/20...rry-litman

[pdq]

Well, this is a special case. A writ may be appropriate in this regard, especially since the appeals court has had to strike down and straighten up Cannon more than once with this particular defendent.