Posted on 04/02/2017 8:28:40 PM PDT by Elderberry
If the search warrant is not good, then evidence gained pursuant gets suppressed. – Judge Susan Criss
Waco – To get a conviction for engaging in organized criminal activity, the DA is going to have to put in the hands of the accused the weapons specified in the indictments of the defendants arrested at Twin Peaks on May 17, 2015.
That will be a difficult task if former District Judge Susan Criss’s challenge to the search warrants is successful. She objects to the method used by 19th Criminal District Court Judge Ralph Strother and a colleague, District Judge Gary Coley to issue the search warrants seeking DNA specimen from the defendants.
The dispute centers around a zealous attempt to match DNA found upon weapons confiscated as evidence at the scene of the mass killings with that of the accused.
The ex-Judge is holding in her defense of her client that the warrants of search to obtain tissue swabs for the purpose are invalid because the Courts did not ensure their execution in a way befitting the due process guaranteed by the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.
In this classic clash of constitutional conflict, hand to hand among the lions and lionesses of the courts, what could be more dramatic? For a courthouse resembles nothing so much in our American republic than a temple – a temple of justice – and who dares teach the law there?
The Judges, known in polite and professional parlance as the Courts, are the learned rabbis of the law. Who would argue that their instruction does anything less than guide and direct the very character of a community?
The Courts teach the law. All others who appear there in advocacy practice the law.
Selah!
Judge Susan Criss represents Rolando Reyes, a member of Los Caballeros Motorcycle Club of Killeen, a support club associated with Los Bandidos U.S.A. He is one of 177 persons arrested and 155 later indicted for engaging in organized criminal activity, activity that led to either capital murder, attempted capital murder, or aggravated assault on that fateful day.
As a District Judge in Galveston, she once presided over civil cases involving thousands of litigants and hundreds of lawyers, as well as one of the most complex murder cases in American history the dismemberment murder case that resulted in the acquittal of Robert Durst, a man she later described to a journalist as “very dangerous,” a “person (who) knew what they were doing and that it was not the first time.”
In this case, she has invoked the dreaded Michael Morton law regarding withholding exclupatory evidence that would tend to lead to a finding of the innocence of the accused.
Her motion before 19th Criminal District Ralph T. Strother alleges that all communications between the District Attorney, his staff, and the Judge and his staff are required by “the authority of Tex. Code. Crim. Proc. Ann. Art. 39.14, otherwise known as The Michael Morton Act.”
The invocation of that law led to a Georgetown District Judge’s felony conviction over his conduct as a prosecutor in State v. Michael Morton. District Judge Ken Anderson resigned his bench, lost his license to practice law, and served time for the crime for which he was accused and convicted, the failure to include in discovery the recollection of Mr. Morton’s little boy, who told an investigator with the District Attorney’s Office that a “monster with red hands” killed his mother with a two-by-four and “broke the bed,” then covered her body with an open suitcase, details only an eye witness would have known.
The monster was not his father, Michael Morton.
No one knew. Anderson did not allow it to be discovered as exculpatory evidence, something that could have led to his acquittal for the charge of murdering his wife and his subsequent sentence to serve out his life behind bars.
The Waco court system is extremely hostile to discovery of evidence. Most criminal defendants sign a “agreed order for discovery” promulgated by the Courts, and that’s as far as the matter goes. Court-appointed lawyers never even file a motion for discovery, much less a motion for a pre-indictment examining trial. Those who do are allowed to make an inspection of the materials at the DA’s offices under what is known as the “open file” policy; they are allowed to make no copies, and must rely upon their notes lest any of the material wind up in the hands of defendants or their associates.
In the Twin Peaks cases, there is an overkill of release of dicovery items on a serial basis that is preventing the defense bar from being prepared for trial due to their inability to absorb and catalogue all the myriad items spilling upon their desks at the odd moment.
In a letter to Strother, Judge Criss expands upon her complaint of ex parte communication between the Court and the DA’s staff, something which she deems “troublesome.”
One of those troublesome details is “The State took the position of refusing to sign the agreed reset form unless our client submitted to their demand and your purported order for our client to go the D.A.’s office. Much discovery is yet to be had without the added delay the processing of this DNA will add. The attorneys are already put in a precarious position of trying to preserve our clients’ rights to a Speedy Trial while ensuring we are adequately prepared by having examined all of the evidence in the discovery process.”
Issues of malpractice may arise should a counselor assert his readiness for trial and not be aware of another thousand pages of discovery material yet to be released.
“Getting notice of the existence of a court order as a mention in an email from a staff member of the D.A.’s office is troublesome. If an order is issued by this Honorable Court then the lawyers and parties are entitled to have the written order or at least be told how to acquire it. If the order is verbal then it is not going to be enforceable without some verifiable record of exactly what is ordered. And then there is the whole isue of due process in the securing of an order without prior notice to the other side.
“We have been put in a position of not really knowing if an order was issued by the Court, what the exact order was, what the circumstance of the order being rendered were and how to acquire any more information about the supposed order. This makes it impossible to advise our clients and render effective representation. This makes it impossible to make an effective record. Our adversary cannot serve as our intermediary with the Court. Furthermore our not being able to provide input to the Court prior to court orders being rendered causes multiple problems.”
Quite simply, she states in her letter to Judge Strother, “more than one employee” of the DA’s office told her that he, Strother, ordered her client to appear at the DA’s office on February 16, 2017 to help the prosecutors execute a search warrant signed by a judge other than yourself. To this day I do not know if that is true.”
Though Judge Criss makes no objection to a judge ordering defendants on bond to make appearances in court in pereson, “I do strenuously object to ‘court’ being held in the prosecutor’s offices. I object to a status conference being parlayed into a mechanism for the Court to assist the prosecution in executing a search warrant issued by another judge.”
Had Strother signed the warrant it would still not be appropriate “for the Court to participate in any way shape or form in the execution of said warrant. Again I have only the word of the prosecutor that the Court was ordering our appearance at the D.A.’s office. And I am not at all confident that the Court rendered any such order.”
One acidic comment in Judge Criss’s letter to Judge Strother recalls the adage that most of what we know we learned before we were five years of age:
To add the indignity of having the prosecution demand we play in their sandbox to avoid further waiving our clients’s Constitutional rights is problematic on many ethical, constitutional and appellate levels.
Asked about the ramifications of her filings, Judge Criss responded, If the search warrant is not good, then evidence gained pursuant gets suppressed.
We the People may well witness law at is it being made, here, in this city, Jerusalem-on-the-Brazos.
One may read the Original DNA Search Warrant by clicking here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xwlok2p2pp41dy9/Original%20DNA%20Search%20Warrant%20-%20Reyes.pdf?dl=0
To read the Second Search Warrant, click here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ev602j2lirgz8lo/2nd%20DNA%20search%20warrant%20-%20Reyes.pdf?dl=0
In an open records request to the District Attorney’s Office, Judge Criss made certain to “request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the issues involved here.”
“An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic. Self-government is not possible unless the citizens are educated sufficiently to enable them to exercise oversight. It is therefore imperative that the nation see to it that a sustainable education be provided for in all its citizens.” ~~~Thomas Jefferson
” Until then; pass the popcorn and say a prayer thanking God you weren’t there by chance that day.”
Not chance. Choice. I don’t hang out with motorcycle gangs ...
You seem to know a lot about this case.
In your opinion, why is this taking so long to go to trial?
I just read things here and there about it. It seems the longer the wait the less likely justice will be done.
Pardon me for jumping in, but
#1, complexities of the multiple issues for multiple defendants,
#2, Actions, such as last week’s by the P informing the D of the existence of possible exculpatory evidence. This is done to the greatest extent possible to deny any post-conviction appeals that it was not done.
#3, Most probably Tier 2 defs coming in with proffers, trying to make a deal to avoid serious jail time. In many cases, the proffer will include the production of physical evidence or the promise of the physical location of such. That is so much better than just spoken testimony. Such physical evidence takes time to work. As just one example, someone has access to the gangs’ accounting, and remember, that’s how they got Capone on federal income tax charges.
I realise that. It just seems like they could bring in more manpower to speed things up.
Why didn’t they bring in the exculpatory earlier?
What are the advantages of a speedy trial besides not sitting in jail.
.=?
DA was just informed of a federal investigation into motorcycle gangs. Ergo. feds might have a UC or informant there.
The state cases and fed cases people will work together. Tier 2 defs in state case roll over for lighter sentences, pro, or even DJICOA. State will require such persons to “bring a lot to the table,” i.e., info re: Fed felonies, the drug (meth) manufacturing and dealing, and of course, the catchall, income tax evasion.
They’re all toast, which, of course, is what the people and the laws of the State of Texas demand.
Well bully for you gator bait.
Ignore them.
They were abused children, and despite their 3 years in 7th grade, basic logical thought is still a problem for them.
“If this is so true, why does the prosecution keep delaying going to trial?”
They don’t. They simply meet their legal obligation to inform the Defense of any exculpatory evidence that may exist,,, as they did last week,,,, as they are required by law to do.
>
I never ceased to be amazed at the “legal system” in Whacko! They aren’t even subtle about their criminal behavior.
>
You mean the ‘legal’ system in GENERAL. Just look at the Hawaii vs. Trump case, Cankles vs. ‘private server’, etc.
>
Just wonder, in Texas, what level of judicial malfeasance does it take to get the State involved.
>
This one we all know: When it’s one of theirs, or the ‘anointed’ cabal.
Just like the ‘boys in blue’, they will move Heaven and Earth when one of theirs is hurt. You\me\us? Best fill out the form if/when they show up.
But, maleficence\graft\corruption? Circle the wagons! You\me\us? There’s *NO* taxpayer $$ not spent to have ‘em throw the book.
Wasn’t like we weren’t warned. History is replete w/ examples; even came in easy to read/understand form: Animal Farm, 1984, Atlas Shrugged, etc.
“Just like the ‘boys in blue’, they will move Heaven and Earth when one of theirs is hurt.”
Interesting. What do you think the next move will be for the Cossacks?
So it’s just coincidence that every time a trial date gets close, they dribble out a little more ‘exculpatory evidence’?
And if there’s that much ‘exculpatory evidence’ to dribble out, how good a case do they really have?
You make claims that are simply not true.
Thank about it this way, if these click bait anti-gov nut sites are trying so hard to have the evidence never presented, then how bad must it be.
These sites are jailhouse lawyers stating conclusions that are in search of real legal evidence... that does not exist.
Bottom line, despite all the claims otherwise, a bunch of motorcycle punks murdered some other people.... and McCellnon County will have it TON of flesh.
“You mean the ‘legal’ system in GENERAL. Just look at the Hawaii vs. Trump case, Cankles vs. ‘private server’, etc.”
Yes, to be sure, but the situation in Whacko is predicated on a bunch of “good old boy” a$$holes bent on covering up the criminal behavior of the Whacko Cops and the McLennan County DA. Their behavior goes well beyond the usual way the system treats ordinary citizens. But I guess when you have potential murder by cop to cover up, they pull out all the stops. Beyond that, it looks like the State of Texas is complicit by their “silence.” I guess because the defendants are bikers who by definition, “need killing!”
The issue was a bad/non-existent warrant and prosecutor/judge misconduct. What they are doing there to the bikers is not legitimate proceedings.
You are just hearing typical jailhouse lawyer arguments.
Here’s a little 45 year legal insight: The defense attorneys are all screaming, because that’s what they do at this point. It gets them some possible conditioning of the jury pool, which will not happen in this case. They are also trying to get media attention for two reasons, it gives credibility to their later argument for a change of venue due to “too much media coverage” to get an impartial jury,” and it is free publicity to get them more possibly winnable cases, lesser felonies, typical B & Es, DWIs, etc.
The DA is going what they do at this point; speaking to the court through motions when they have to. The latest disclosure motion was absolutely required by law. Had he not done so, it could easily have created a valid cause for a new trial on appeal.
DA will start to speak, not about the defs, but about the crime itself, only after venue is settled. He will then tell TV audiences in wherever the trial goes, (If memory serves, Texas moves the judge and the trial to the distant venue, it does not bring in a jury to the original venue) how horrible the crime was, but little about the defs.
He will tell the Good People of X (My guess, Amarillo - Potter County) how horrible the crimes were, good people died, Texas demands justice, etc. because in a a case like this, you first “try the crime, then you try the case.”
Don’t be influenced by the anti-LEO and government haters here, or even worse, the def attorneys. If they had a case, they wouldn’t be so desperate now.
The guy in effect just called (former) District Judge Susan Criss a "jailhouse lawyer".
Like you had said;
which was the gist of Judge Criss's stated objections.
It's far too late for that. He already did. Swanton did too. Then-- they attempted to muzzle the defense (after they got their licks in, towards as you said; "conditioning the jury [pool]).
YOU, who calls yourself Strac6, and you're compatriot --- are the ones whom "should not listened to", for YOU are attempting to "condition the jury pool" yourself, right now. You stinking hypocrite!
If Renya truly had a case for all 154 defendants -- you wouldn't need to have signed up to FR in order to try and sway public opinion. Every time you point the finger, there are the rest of that handful of your own pointing right back at you.
Who the F are you? Really.
No more BS'ing. Answer the question, or STFU regarding the making of all the rude-ass accusations.
Amazing how many lawyers are on FR. And yes there are major problems with the prosecution’s case; has been from the beginning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.