Monday, May 18, 2009

Defense Lawyer Asks For Gableman to Recuse Himself

Last I checked, many judges - including the liberal ones - run on “tough on crime” platforms.  This lawyer is reaching. 

Henak filed the motion in his defense of Aaron Antonio Allen, who was sentenced to 37 years in prison after being convicted in 1999 of armed robbery and possessing a firearm as a felon in Milwaukee County. Allen contends he had ineffective counsel.

Henak said Gableman shouldn’t hear the case because of comments he made during the campaign, including promises not to “look for loopholes to put criminals back on our streets.”

“The facts of this case demonstrate either actual bias or the appearance of bias by Justice Gableman in favor of the state and against those, such as Allen, who are accused of crimes,” Henak wrote.

(9) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0638 hrs
Law + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. Gee, what are the odds this Henak fellow is a Democrat?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 0808 hrs


  2. Regardless of party, what are the odds this is a lawyer looking to make a name for himself?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 1138 hrs


  3. Sorry guys, I already have a name for myself (Wisconsin Superlawyers (top 5% of lawyers in the state) for the last four years straight; named a Leader in the Law 2005 by the Wisconsin Law Journal).  And, by the way, the motion was filed April 18 and I made no attempt to publicize it beyond posting it on my website.  So much for your self-agrandizement theory.

    Anyway, if you want to be able to actually read the motions rather than commenting from ignorance or spin, you can get them from my website:  www.henaklaw.net You might actually learn something.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 1408 hrs


  4. OK, I read it.  Do you know what I learned? 

    You’re reaching.

    Posted by Owen on May 18, 2009 at 1452 hrs


  5. I believe old Shirley ran on the tough on crime platform recently as well.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 1518 hrs


  6. Shirley, however, did not disparage anyone for having been a public defender.  There is a valid point there, albeit a thin line.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 1625 hrs


  7. So if a judge ever made a negative comment about a defense attorney they are now not allowed to rule on the case? 

    This all comes back to a larger issue.  If we were to follow the notion in the brief, a judge could be forced to recuse himself if he had ever expressed any opinion whatsoever.  For example, by the same logic in the brief, if a judge had said “public defenders serve a vital function in our Judicial system and should be commended for their service,” it could be interpreted as the judge favoring public defenders.  It’s ludicrous. 

    If we are going to elect judges, then they have to be allowed to expressed their opinions so that the voters can make an informed decision.  Otherwise, what’s the point?

    Posted by Owen on May 18, 2009 at 1643 hrs


  8. “And, by the way, the motion was filed April 18 and I made no attempt to publicize it beyond posting it on my website.  So much for your self-agrandizement theory.”

    Yeah cause posting a motion on a website is normal?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 18, 2009 at 1733 hrs


  9. The motion might stand a chance under Caperton if WMC was a party in the matter.  But a stated “tough on crime” position won’t provide the legal standing of a snow ball’s chance in hell. 

    Personally, I think a motion requesting Gableman’s recusal on the grounds that he is intellectually challenged would have gotten the same result and be far more amusing to file.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 19, 2009 at 2305 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.