"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Friday, January 8, 2016

Corrupt NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct leaves yet another drunk driving judge on the bench

The New York State (Corrupt) Commission for Judicial Conduct has issued an order of censure against Supreme Court Justice of Kings County Carl F. Landicino, yet another drunk-driving judge who touted his judgeship in his effort to reduce a felony charge to a speeding ticket.

Judge Landicino admitted to be an alcoholic, claimed to have attended treatment, and through such claims, escaped removal and remains on the bench.

His felony grand jury indictment was reduced to a misdemeanor.

His vehicle was not civilly forfeited, as it could be.

There is no report that his license was suspended, as it should have been because he repeatedly refused to submit to a breathalyzer test.

Despite his admission as being an alcoholic for many years (which he did not disclose in his election campaign, otherwise, very possibly, he would not have been elected), he was sentenced to a conditional discharge, and not to probation, and was thus not subject to:

  1. mandatory Ignition Interlock Device on all vehicles in his family - a costly measure bankrupting many families of drunk drivers;
  2. curfew;
  3. mandatory warrantless searches of his residence
In fact, had he been placed on probation, Judge Landicino would have been in jail now, because he admitted to several "relapses".

Judge Landicino was not subject to disciplinary proceedings as a lawyer because of his indictment for a felony which requires only preponderance of the evidence, the same evidentiary standard that is required for attorney discipline.

And - New Yorkers, rejoice - Judge Landicino is giving lectures to DWI offenders how, as a drunk driving alcoholic judge he is treated "equally under the law".

Read the full decision about Judge Landicino's slap on the wrist here.

But, since alcoholism cannot be fully cured, watch out if Judge Landicino is drunk on he bench while making decisions about your lives, because the Commission and the criminal court refused to ensure that Judge Landicino's alcoholism that resulted in

  1. unsafe aggressive drunk driving on Interstate 87;
  2. leading a high speed (80 mph) police chase and jeopardizing lives of other people on that highway;
  3. invoking his judicial position in seeking leniency to have his felony charges reduced to a speeding ticket, and that was during the very first year of his judgeship,
  4. changing plates right after arrest from standard to "Supreme Court Justice" and then back to standard right before the disciplinary hearing.
Judge Landicino expressed in many ways his position that, as a judge, he is above the law.

And the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct that allows its members to drum up business out of their own positions, allowed Judge Landicino to escape without losing his judgeship, for doing the same.

By the way, here is a decision from Mississippi denying reinstatement of a disbarred attorney.

The Mississippi reinstatement court stated the following:

"We find that Morrison has failed to satisfy us that he has effectively rehabilitated himself “to the point that he should enjoy a license to practice law.”  In coming to this conclusion, we note the seriousness of his offense.   While the felony embezzlement charges were dismissed or nolle prosequied, these were felony level charges involving fraud, deceit, and dishonesty, which he also attempted to hide from an investigation."

Same as in Judge Landicino's case, the attorney was charged, but not convicted for a felony.

Same as in Judge Landicino's case, the attorney "attempted to hide from an investigation".

Moreover, in Judge Landicino's case the judge not only "attempted to hide from an investigation", but did it by engaging in a high-speed chase for 2 miles, on a highway, while the trooper chasing him, with lights and a siren on, had to change the tone of the siren twice before the judge pulled over.

In Mr. Morrison's case, Mr. Morrison simply attempted to hide from an investigation.

In Judge Landicino's case, the judge attempted to hide in a way that jeopardized safety and lives of many other people.

Mr. Morrison was disbarred.

Judge Landicino remains on the bench, with his law license intact.


Maybe, this is the reason?

"For five years, Landicino, who declined to comment for this story, has been attorney for the Kings County Democratic Party. And over the last 12 years he has made a career out of suing would-be challengers to the Brooklyn Democrats’ favored nominees for legislative and other elected seats."

Landicino was a valuable guy to many influential people, for a very long time before he came to the bench.

For that reason, he can remain on the highways and on the bench, without any restrictions or checks on his alcoholism as other drunk drivers have, and can continue to be the "Honorable" member of the judiciary and the legal profession until he kills somebody, and even then he may be given a slap on the wrist, as Otsego County Judge Burns gave to a rich and influential killer of a young woman recently, see my blogs here and here.

This is New York, ladies and gentlemen.

This is not Mississippi.

No comments:

Post a Comment