(7) FINANCIAL DISCREPANCIES; FRAUD; FALSE INFORMATION.–
(a) If the court learns of discrepancies between the application or motion and the actual financial status of the person found to be indigent or indigent for costs, the court shall determine whether the public defender, office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, or private attorney shall continue representation or whether the authorization for any other due process services previously authorized shall be revoked. The person may be heard regarding the information learned by the court. If the court, based on the information, determines that the person is not indigent or indigent for costs, the court shall order the public defender, office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, or private attorney to discontinue representation and revoke the provision of any other authorized due process services.
(b) If the court has reason to believe that any applicant, through fraud or misrepresentation, was improperly determined to be indigent or indigent for costs, the matter shall be referred to the state attorney. Twenty-five percent of any amount recovered by the state attorney as reasonable value of the services rendered, including fees, charges, and costs paid by the state on the person’s behalf, shall be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the Grants and Donations Trust Fund within the Justice Administrative Commission. Seventy-five percent of any amount recovered shall be remitted to the Department of Revenue for deposit into the General Revenue Fund.
(c) A person [even an attorney] who knowingly provides [files] false information to the clerk or the court in seeking a determination of indigent status under this section commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
48 responses to “Please Read Florida Statute 27.52(7) Regarding Determination of Indigent Status”
If you will, would you give us your take on what happened in court today?
Also, does Mason act as cocky and obnoxious as he did today (IMO), in front of a jury?
Lastly, while I have respect for Judge Strickland, it appeared to me that the courtroom was not his today. (BTW, does anyone know what Judge Ito is doing these days?)
What do you think about the new lawyer on the case? What is going to happen? Any thoughts on the jailhouse letters? I miss your blogs!!!
My take is that Cheney Mason came into court expecting to give the good ‘old boy routine and get the home town treatment. Instead he committed the cardinal sin of lawyering; which is forgetting who is the attorney and who is the judge.
I could not believe he asked the judge to tell a nationwide audience that “he trusted him.” It gives the appearance of favoritism, impropriety, and could have lead to Judge Strickland being recused if he said yes.
Also, it was extremely clear that Mr. Mason has no grasp of the current procedure for having a person declared indigent. I surmise he was brought on by Baez to protect Baez from scrutiny – not protect Casey Anthony’s interest.
My odds are that today’s hearing will lead to Jose Baez being investigated by the Florida Bar.
Did you notice the look on Stirkland’s face when Jose admitted that Malacaso (sp?) donated $70,000 to the case? Andrea also admitted that her “clinic” contributed to the case. I smell a rat and loved watching Jose squirm today admitting that his client sold pictures of her victim. I hope Jose goes down.
The defense is nothing but a three ring circus with a bunch of clowns dressed up as lawyers.
Richard,
Here it is from Orlando Sentinel – now what happens to Baez after this admission from ABC? I would think he is in deep trouble!
“I asked ABC News if the deal was done with Casey Anthony.
The deal was done with an attorney representing several owners of copyrighted content, ABC News spokeswoman Cathie Levine said. That attorney is Baez, she added.”
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent…y+%28TV+Guy%29
From your mouth to God’s ears Richard! I was under the impression that Baez was NOT supposed to broker deals for his client. I hope that someone does contact the bar assn. and have them watch the hearing. Between Baez and the new “good ol’ boy wannabe” today was a farce. Judge Strickland, who I happen to love, needs to get a hold of these guys who think they are running the courtroom and let them know just who’s courtroom it is.
Great article in re. fraudulent representation while applying for indigency status! I have a hunch we will be re-reading this again sooner than later.
Cheney Mason seemed to be caught off-guard by Judge Strickland refusing to bite into his request for an ‘in camera’ hearing in re. the defense expenditures to date. Sent scambling to huddle in the jury room to come up with Plan B. Plan B blows up in the face of a couple of their own. Talk about a circus!!! Seriously, I work in the legal field, too. This is an embarrassment.
Mr. Hornsby,
Cheney Mason was rude and arrogant, he made a very bad first impression on me. Why should Judge Strickland take his words? Another arrogant smirky added to KC’s staff of lawyers. Good luck on that. In my layperson opinion.
Mr. Hornsby, you wrote:
“I could not believe he asked the judge to tell a nationwide audience that “he trusted him.” It gives the appearance of favoritism, impropriety, and could have lead to Judge Strickland being recused if he said yes.”
IIRC Mr. Horsnby, Judge Strickland said “yes I would” or something like that. That was so uncomfortable I could not believe it. Why would we take his words for that? CM is a lawyer for goodness sake. Please tell me Judge Strickland won’t be recused!!! I respect him so much!!!
What about Todd Macaluso? He gave money to KC, is it legal??? TM is under investigation we all know, that Disciplinary Program, I forgot the real name.
Please and thank you!!!
my main concern today is the money given by the atty. no longer on this case: Mancuso. Is it common for an atty. to pay to join a defense team and is it at all possible that the money he “gave” might have something to do with his troubles in another state? if so, how will that affect Casey’s case?
The judge DID say he trusted that doddering buffoon Mason, after Mason pushed him on it.
I also would like to hear your thoughts on this:
“The deal was done with an attorney representing several owners of copyrighted content, ABC News spokeswoman Cathie Levine said. That attorney is Baez, she added.”
Specifically, the SEVERAL OWNERS Baez represented during the sale. Not just Casey but also someone else???? (George, Cindy and/or Lee?)
Baez is a criminal defense attorney right? So how can he even broker this kind of deal involving his client and other “owners”????
Mr. Hornsby,
Do you believe that Jose spent 2500 hours on Casey’s case in a year and a half that he did not track? I thought all lawyers tracked hours very closely 🙂 That would be 312.5 normal 8 hour days without subtracting weekends. Shouldn’t he be supplying his client with a monthly statement that itemizes what he has done and the charges relating to such? I’m not getting a very good feeling about Jose and his accounting practices. Could this give Casey grounds for an appeal even though she has not gone to trial? It appears that he may have squandered her money while she rots in jail. Just to be clear, I think she is where she belongs and perhaps Jose should join her. TIA
Mr. Hornsby,
In addition to the possible ethical violations against Jose, how about George and Cindy. I’m assuming they are the other owners referred to by ABC. In their depos they stated they had not received $$$ for photos etc. except for their appearance on 48 hours. Even if they did not received the $$ directly, but assigned it to the defense fund, but were indeed parties to the sale, isn’t their statement untrue?
I have no doubt that Mr. Baez has spent an enormous amount of time on the case; I just happen to think he spent his time appearing on television, sticking his foot in his mouth, trying to get people to work for free so he could keep more money, etc.
If you boil down what he has done himself, it comes down to a handful of two page motions and several unimportant hearings. Whatever substantive work that has been done, was clearly generated by Ms. Lyons or to some extent (Ms. Baden).
In one regard, I agree with Mr. Mason 100% – $250K is nothing for a First Degree Murder case; unless, of course, you are an attorney who has never seen a bank account with $250K in it before.
Mr. Hornsby:
Thank you for the post, appreciate the insight.
WHY would Mason Cheney presumptuously state the Public Defenders Office as financially incapable? Would the reason be, as the statute you provided outlined?
How up to speed could this eleventh hour Mason be, considering the pro bono assertion…lol IYO would you surmise that the JAC will find improprieties, and/or recommend that a public defender be assigned? What is the odds that Baez will lose his license to practice?
Per your assertion regarding[vis a vis blog radio] 700+, why would Baez vehemently deny if only to be found out? Thank you
Kate, please check the blogtalk interview again. I have never asserted that I thought a $700K deal was made – that was Rozzie Franco, a reporter for WDBO.
As for why Mason had the Robert Wesley there, I do not know.
Mr. Wesley gave me my first job out of law school and I consider him a mentor, so my comments about him will be limited to this – he is an elected official and the legislature is in session.
I do so enjoy reading your reponses to current events, and your insights.
Just wanted to say thank you.
Thank you Mr Hornsby:
I stand corrected. So without stepping on principle, IYO what are the odds that the JAC may recommend a public defender? Basically, I see way to much politics’s, yes I do know Law is Politics’s and Politics is Law. But I guess what I am getting at is, if the general public can see the conflicts, what would be fair assessment via JAC?
Hypothetical question, if you were the Attorney, what would you have done differently?
Dawnis, just read your post. That would be my next question to Mr. Hornsby.
The fact ABC concedes the broker is in fact Baez, it appears more than a conflict? Mr. Hornsby?
Mr. Hornsby,
Thank you for this most informative post! If Baez is removed from the case, will this delay the trial? Would Judge Strickland appoint a new attorney or would one of the other attorneys on record be able to take over without delay?
Mr. Hornsby,
Could there be a conflict of interest between Mr. Mason if he represented Dominic Casey at some point for the Zenaida civil trial? As shown in number 5 on page 2 of this document?
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/09/16/exhibit.c.pdf
richard,thanks a lot,you are right,the defense are clowns,and mason is a RUDE old man,the jury will hate him!
Mr.Hornsby,
Do you think Ms.Lyon’s will leave the case now?
Baez sure wasted $70k on his spokesperson Marti M.He did most of her job himself. (an a bad one at that)
That is just it. The public defender would never be appointed, I think Mason was implying that if Casey Anthony had to accept “court appointed counsel” – the cost would be even greater to the State. THEREFORE (emphasis for point) the State ACTUALLY is saving money by all of these big shot attorneys working for free instead of the state having to pay the extra money for a court appointed attorney AND the costs.
Mr. Hornsby, thank you for your insight.
Since it’s been said, Inmate Anthony has been corresponding with another inmate in Federal prison, can her probation be revoked? She is not to correspond with other felons. I understand she’s in prison but to correspond with another inmate without permission from the jail, can her probation be revoked and that time added onto her 1 year sentence for fraud? TIA
richard,what wood you change (i know its a lot) when you had this case???????
Really glad you’re back Richard. Read some of your blogs over at WS. We need you more than ever.
D asked ABC News if the deal was done with Casey Anthony.
The deal was done with an attorney representing several owners of copyrighted content, ABC News spokeswoman Cathie Levine said. That attorney is Baez, she added.
ABC does not state that no further money is coming down the track. Can Baez broker deals for his client (and several others) I though that was unethical. Also, at the beginning when he took on this case, apparently Casey told him she had approx. $5000.00, would he not know then that there is no way she could pay for a trial.
Sorry my mistake I meant $10k to Marti M.
I was amazed with how ill-prepared Baez was for today’s hearing. He has now been given 15 days by Judge Strickland to come up with a detailed, itemized list of all funds that were managed by him (credits and debits), something he should have known to do prior to this hearing. And the circus continues . . .
Richard
What do you make of Jose’s testimony that he was retained on JUNE 17th? Did I mishear this, did he mean to say JULY 17th? If he was retained on JUNE 17th in my opinion this is huge. Remember that post you wrote a while ago about when Jose was retained, looks like you were not far off the mark.
🙂
Stocirpa, I believe the 15 days is to go over the Sealed motion that was released from the prosecution yesterday or the day before. Maybe I’m wrong.
But your right at how unprepared Baez and Co. were today. I know here if you go into a lawyers office they have a machine that counts off the minutes that you are with the lawyer. I thought all lawyers had to keep records of this. Maybe that is only hear. Richard could you update us on this, please.
Just a ? or 2. I’m curious why the topic of paying taxes on the $275,000.00 was not brought up. Surly the law abiding tax paying citizens of this state want to know if ABC issued 1099’s and to whom they went to and, of course, the $$$ was indeed declared and proper taxes were paid to the feds. Can that be asked and more importantly can that be followed up by proof?
I find it odd that Mr. Mason’s co-representation of Nelson Serrano and the outcome of it is not mentioned (it did not end well for his client). How is he escaping that?
Something else I had to say but I done forgot it now. Shoot, hate when that happens!
OH I know it was a comment, this aint no parade, it’s a dang freak show!
Mr. Hornsby, it is so good to be able to read your views once again. I like you open straight up all out honest opinions on issues concerning this case. As Dars mentioned, your post about when Baez became council for Casey, was most interesting and left me wondering about a possibility. Dang, do you have an email address? I sure would like to ask one question confidentially.
As always, Thank You for your time and effort in keeping us informed.
@Angie It doesn’t make for “breaking” news that a high profile attorney – who lost his most recent death penalty case – joined the Casey Anthony defense team.
@Dars I think it was a misstatement – probably because he was subliminally thinking about my blog.
@Angie again. Since there is no income tax in Florida, the taxes are a federal issue, not a state issue. So while it sounds good that the money was not reported or not paid, it is unenforceable by any the State Attorney or JAC.
@Marcia Thanks 🙂
Hey Richard, thanks for the response. Would love to hear your views on the whole hearing – any chance you will blog on it?
Well, I reread your article on when Baez was retained and I still think you were on to something.
Everyone should read it again for a reminder.
Richard, I am so glad you have given your opinion as I was fuming while watching this on IN SESSION. The thing that irks me is that KC was indigent when Baez first represented her. He must have been “scheming immediately, as I hardly believe that his law firm & his 3 years legal experience, could remotely finance KC’s case even if she were never charged with the Death Penalty.
Boy! If he hadn’t schemed to sell those memories of Caylee’s, KC would have been indigent over a year ago. It also IRKS me that Baez basically was paid “while he learned on the job” as he still has difficulty filing motions correctly! In the $275,000.00, that doesn’t include the “Defense Fund” A Lyon’s mentioned that she has taken 50,000.00 from. So Richard, does every Attorney now pay for what they do when a client has no money?
@Artnut The financial disclosure is not about Casey Anthony, it is about Jose Baez.
If someone like Baez is not held accountable and is allowed to hide behind a notorious client and reap the financial rewards without being personally held accountable, then other shady attorneys will follow suit and take on every case that remotely smells like it could be lucrative and high profile.
Thank you for replying to my ?’s.
I understand the meaning behind the “Breaking” news part I just didn’t understand the “has been successful in defending 50 first-degree murder cases” but left out is the “outta how many”.
I may be wrong here but… if a resident in this state went to apply for unemployment, food stamps, medicaid, etc… don’t they have to show prior tax filings for the past X amount of years in order to be approved?
Again, thank you for replying.
Yes, they do have to supply that information – but they don’t have a constitutional right to unemployment, food stamps, medicaid, etc…
On the other hand, you have a constitutional right to “the assistance of counsel” and “due process” of law when accused of a crime. So the threshold for obtaining your constitutional – versus statutory – rights are much lower.
Richard..
DENNY CRANE ALERT!!!..Cheny Mason is such a Denny CRANE-wannabe ( he looks like an old drunk too)!..By contrast you are much more handsome than James Spader….And, while I am casting — Joe Pesci will play BOZO BAEZ…
Anyway, I am soooo delighted that you are B-A-A-A-C-K!! (So, we can call off the St.Bernards search looking for you buried in a snowbank?..)…
I think Shannon Stoy/ BLINK began to believe that she drove you underground after your expose..
Pretty please keep writing….
sincerely, violette
Mr. Hornsby,
Forgot to thank you for your articles and blog.
From my understanding, JB is the only lawyer charging for fees right? So, does he have to break down as how much he charged for his fees?? Sometimes it is very confusing.
Thank you very much!!!
How or why did Mason show up so unprepared for this hearing?
How did he think he could get away with saying the past was no ones business? He showed up a little to cocky and arrogant in my opinion.
It appears that the defense hasn’t done 150,000.00 worth of work.
Casey has a right to her defense, but if the judge finds anything that appears out of order or out of the ordinary, will he put stricter requirements on the reimbursement and/or experts they use?
Looking forward to more of your dry sense of humor, and edgy quips.
Glad this blog is back–was missed.Really like you straight forward approach. Question Mr. Hornsby. How come Mr.Baez has to give Judge Strickland/JAC his accounting of money spent{which I certainly agree with } but Andrea Lyon does not?Something is fishy about her testemoney… Baez gets $200,000 from ABC. Out of that he is paid 89,000,Lyon 22,500. Lyon uses approx. 70,000 of her Clinic for poor defendents funds, but says to the state when they ask her what she used it for? that they can deduct that 22,500 from it. Which is it ??? Did she get 22,500 from the clinc or from Caseys money?? Wish somebody could explain this to me.
Mr. Hornsby,
I just read this article and you make a good sense to me in your comments, from my understanding the only lawyer NOT working pro bono was Jose Baez right? How convenient for him to make his own fees, this guy is unbelievable. I certainly would like to see his detailed finances book. Do you believe we will ever see it?
http://www.cfnews13.com/News/Local/2010/3/19/judge_grants_anthony39s_motion_for_indigency.html
“The question is, were there fair terms when the contract was made for Jose Baez to keep the money and stay on this counsel,” said Richard Hornsby, a defense attorney.
Hornsby said $200,000 is not a lot of money to fund a capital murder case, but said how money is “handled” can play into legal ethical questions.
“If he has a financial incentive, the less money he spends, the more money he keeps,” Hornsby said. “Than obviously that creates a big conflict of interest.”
Thank you very much!!!
Excellent article, Mr. Hornsby.
My God, though. This family, the Anthonys, and their attorneys sold Caylee’s photos, videos and story for money to defend her mother/murderer. How can that possibly be legal, let alone ethical? And since when is it legal for a defendant’s defense team to fund the defense? Even if it’s a grant from one of those attorney’s nonprofit organization. The conflict of interest is apparent. Is this legal? How can it be?
I would appear the not only did Casey sell Caylee’s images, but George, Cindy & possibly Lee all did, too. What complete moral bankruptcy. It makes me sick! That poor creature. No one respected this child in that family. And she was so adorably. Why?