Our blog has moved, and is new and improved.

You should be automatically redirected in 3 seconds. If not, visit
MinnLawyerBlog.com
and update your bookmarks.

Showing posts with label Dakota County. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dakota County. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

First District challenge turns ugly


There is a very disturbing judicial campaign going on in the bucolic landscape of the First Judicial District. Dakota County Judge Joe Carter, pictured at right, is being challenged by Rice County prosecutor Nathaniel Reitz, who appears to be basing his campaign on the tragic case of Justin P. Farnsworth, who sexually assaulted a 9-year-old girl in his custody. Farnsworth had a 10-year old rape conviction but was described by officials as a “success story.” Carter, following the advice of experienced court-appointed custody evaluator David Jaehne, awarded custody of the child to Farnsworth with the consent of her mother, who evidently didn’t want her.

Reitz has adopted the dubious campaign tactic of linking from his Web site to a Google page of links to blog postings vilifying Carter. If you read all the way to the end of the muck, you get one link to an AP news story. That story raises the issue of whether a guardian ad litem should have been appointed for the child. It also pointed out that the case is one of many tragedies in the child-protection system.

Reitz’s bio says that he is a prosecutor who takes rape cases seriously, which no doubt is true. It doesn’t say that he is a volunteer guardian ad litem or serves any policy-making function with respect to the child protection system. Minnesota’s child protection system recently failed a federal audit, at least in part because the state is unwilling to devote the resources needed to keep up with cases in a timely manner. In the Farnsworth custody case, there were no allegations of abuse to require the appointment of a guardian ad litem and apparently no family or community members taking an interest. There were likely no funds available to pay a guardian ad litem and it’s a tremendous amount of work to ask a volunteer to contribute.

The state made its policy preferences even more clear this spring when it cut public-defender funding, which resulted in the defenders ceasing to represent parents in CHIPS cases. Since the defenders have previously said that they can’t manage criminal defense and CHIPS cases, their move came as no surprise. The absence of public defenders puts a huge strain on the child- protection system. Reitz would do better to think of some solutions to that problem rather than focus his campaign on crazy blog postings. He says the election is about judgment -- it's time to use some.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Article explores ups and downs of county attorney Backstrom

In case you missed it, Tuesday’s Star Tribune had an interesting article about Dakota County Attorney Jim Backstrom. Many of us know Jim not only as a tenacious prosecutor, but also as an engaging fellow who likes to spring his notorious Elvis impersonation on unsuspecting audiences.

But not everyone knows about the life experiences that have driven Backstrom in his work, including a sometimes less-than-idyllic childhood and the trauma of the 1992 Corinne Erstad case.

We at Minnesota Lawyer can say we knew him when: Backstrom was a Minnesota Lawyer Attorney of the Year in 2002, and he’s contributed several interesting commentary pieces to our newspaper over the years.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

New traffic ticket procedures in Dakota County

When last week’s public reprimands of Judge Rex Stacey and Judge Thomas Murphy came down, also reprimanded by dissenting Justices Paul Anderson and Alan Page was Dakota County’s “flawed” procedures for resolving tickets. (See Minnesota Lawyer story here.) Dakota County has implemented a new system: a person contesting a traffic ticket should come to court and plead not guilty. First Judicial District Assistant Chief Judge Edward Lynch, who is chambered in Hastings, told me that in the event that the court receives some other kind of communication about a ticket (not a favored event, he emphasized) it will be referred to the calendar judge for processing in an open court with a prosecutor present. The response may very well be to come in and plead not guilty, he added. And there will be no requests for other procedures, Lynch said. “I can’t imagine why there would be. This has been a difficult situation and we don’t want to go down that road."

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Judge Dehn on judicial ethics stats

A recent article in the Star Tribune focused on the spate of ethics complaints against Dakota County judges, but there was no comment from the Board on Judicial Standards or its chair, 10th Judicial District Judge James Dehn.

Dehn recently pointed out to Minnesota Lawyer that the board’s most recent report shows that about one in every 1,200 cases handled by a judge generates any contact with the board. Furthermore, the board received 127 written complaints last year compared to the approximately 2.06 million cases handled by judges. Thirty-five judges were asked to respond in writing regarding alleged misconduct, and no public reprimands were issued.

However, Dehn issued a slight disclaimer about his statistics: “There are three types of judges out there. Those who can add and those who cannot.” (Same for lawyers and journalists, I might add ... er say.)

Cases involving the alleged fixing of tickets by two Dakota County judges are under advisement and a public reprimand was issued against a third judge in the county, William Thuet, who agreed to it. Thuet was charged with inappropriately accepting a guilty plea to a DWI involving a former neighbor and procuring the same woman’s release from custody on another occasion.