Appeals Court Polarized in DeLay-related Ruling (Dem Justices Blocked from Filing Dissents)

[Hissyspit]

Source: Houston Chronicle

Appeals court polarized in DeLay-related ruling
The Associated Press
Jan. 2, 2009, 3:45AM

AUSTIN — The polarized state appeals court has ruled that Republican Justice Alan Waldrop did not have to excuse himself from a case against two associates of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. The ruling from the 3rd Court of Appeals does not immediately affect the money-laundering charges against DeLay and his associates, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis. DeLay and his associates, John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, have been accused of laundering corporate money into political donations to Republican candidates in 2002. Use of corporate money is generally banned from state campaigns.

Before any trial, Ellis and Colyandro challenged the constitutionality of the law. Last September, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle asked the court to remove Waldrop because Earle claimed Waldrop betrayed his bias four years ago, before he became a judge. Earle alleged that bias was betrayed when Waldrop called a similar money-laundering allegation in a related civil lawsuit "politically motivated" and an attempt to "harass political opponents." At the time, Waldrop was representing a client who was a political ally of DeLay.

Waldrop wrote an opinion in August that upheld the constitutionality of the law on money laundering but warned that the prosecutors had a fatal flaw in their case, a view that two trial judges and one other appellate judges have disagreed with. Waldrop, Chief Justice Ken Law and a third Republican justice, Robert Pemberton, wrote that the charges against DeLay and his associates should be dismissed because they used a check, not cash, in their transaction. Waldrop argued that the law — before it was changed in 2005 — did not cover checks during the 2002 election. Two Democratic justices on the 3rd Court objected.

Justice Jan Patterson, a Democrat on the Austin-based state appeals court, claimed last year that Law blocked the filing of her dissent to a ruling in October. The ruling overruled a motion asking Waldrop to step aside in the money-laundering case involving DeLay's associates. Justice Diane Henson complained that her GOP colleagues were wrong about the money-laundering law and had bottled up the case for years to thwart prosecution of the high-profile case.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6190853.html

[snot]

1. "Earle just retired and Law's term ended Wednesday."

The End?

[buckrogers1965]

2. A check, seriously?

So I guess this judge would dismiss armed robbery charges from someone if the model of weapon they used wasn't specific listed in the law?

Talk about splitting hairs. Do they have to list pay pal and money orders too? How about if they got paid in Lindens? What if they bribed people with euros, does that need to be specifically listed too? What if they paid someone else to provide you a free service. Do we have to specifically outlaw every service that could ever be offered in order to close that loophole?

No. We don't. Whatever was done was illegal because it was an exchange of value. Political favors for something of value.

Any judge that is making this fine a distinction to let one of his buddies free needs to spend jail time themselves.

[harpboy_ak]

3. It's Texas, corrupt courts abound

Only in Texas do they have elected judges and prosecutors raising bribes^H^H^H^H^H^H"campaign contributions" from the attornies that appear before them. Texas has the most currupt court system in the country --- criminal defendants are screwed unless they can afford to hire a big-time lawyer that has paid up, and good luck in a civil case against any large bidness that can grease judges' palms.

Texas, where the court system is full of the stuff usually found in barnyards.

Cowpie justice.