Don’t expect U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore to be sending any holiday greeting cards to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals any time soon.
In this unusually candid recusal order, Judge Gilmore accuses the appellate court of making an untrue statement in ordering that the the death-penalty case of a truck driver charged in the smuggling deaths of 19 illegal immigrants be reassigned to U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal because Judge Gilmore is “too busy” to handle the case. The Chronicle’s Harvey Rice has a story on the dust-up here.
Earlier posts here, here and here report on the rather strained relationship between Judge Gilmore and the Fifth Circuit over this case. It all started when Judge Gilmore threatened to hold the prosecutors in contempt of court for failing to divulge internal Justice Department deliberations regarding the government’s decision to seek the death penalty against one of the defendants. The prosecution filed a writ of mandamus (that’s like suing the judge) with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals requesting the appellate court to order Judge Gilmore, in effect, to cease ordering the prosecution to turnover evidence of communications that are clearly privileged. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the prosecution, and issued this opinion that, among other things, is a rather sharp rebuke of Judge Gilmore’s treatment of the prosecution in the case.
By the way, Judge Gilmore is currently presiding over the first re-trial of two of the defendants from the original trial of the Enron Broadband case. That first trial ended in a mix of acquittals and a deadlocked jury on certain counts. Interestingly, Judge Gilmore appeared to favor the prosecution in that first trial by declaring a mistrial without giving the jury much time to deliberate after giving them an Allen charge.
Houston's Clear Thinkers
Longtime Houston attorney Tom Kirkendall's observations on developments in law, business, medicine, culture, sports, and other matters of general interest to the Houston business, professional, and academic communities.
Some of those Fifth Circuit writings in this case have been… highly entertaining reading. Unless you are Judge Gilmore, I suppose.
Tom, do you know offhand if the Fifth Circuit has had to give Judge Gilmore similar, umm, guidance (for lack of a better term!) in many other cases?
again the 5th circuit needs the 7th circuit rule–win and you automatically get a new judge.
one wonders why the judge ever got into the principal/aiding abetting bs
I watched Judge Gilmore during much of the first Enron Broadband trial and I was absolutely mortified at her lack of professionalism, ability and common intelligence (legal or otherwise). She ran that courtroom like a bad “In Living Color” sketch with a heavy dose of eye rolling, screaming, “talk to the hand” mentality. She is an embarrassment to the justice system and the profession as a whole. She is a living example of why we should never allow lifetime appointments!
US District Judge Jane J. Boyle also stated that she too is too busy for my case, now before the US Court of Appeals as #05-11206, Montes v. Ransom, etal, an excessive force case. In my appeals brief to recuse Judge Boyle for conflict of interest. She was an employee for seven (7) years for the employer of some of the defendants in my case. She dismissed all of my claims. See PACER. Original trial court USDC NDTX #03:04-CV-1027-B. If you have any questions to email me at danielmontesjr@hotmail.com. Thank you, Daniel Montes, Jr., the plaintiff.