Letter to Kat Cammack PACER Fees Class Action

Letter to Kat Cammack PACER Fees Class Action

U.S. Congresswoman Kat Cammack
5550 Northwest 111th Boulevard
Gainesville, FL 32653

RE: PACER Fees Class Action
https://www.pacerfeesclassaction.com/

Dear Congresswoman Cammack,

As one of your constituents, this is my comment on a federal class action lawsuit against the federal judiciary over PACER fees, a matter not getting sufficient current coverage in the press.

PACER is an acronym for Public Access to Court Electronic Records, and is the electronic public access service for United States federal court (Wikipedia) documents. It allows authorized users to obtain case and docket information from the United States district courts, United States courts of appeals, and United States bankruptcy courts, but not the U.S. Supreme Court. The system is managed by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (Wikipedia) in accordance with the policies of the Judicial Conference (Wikipedia)(FJC)(28 USC 331) headed by U.S. Chief Justice John G. Roberts.

The case alleges the federal judiciary overcharged users of PACER by millions dollars, see:

National Veterans Legal Services Program, et al. v. United States
U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, Case No. 1:16-CV-00745-PLF
U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, Docket No. 2024-1757
https://www.pacerfeesclassaction.com/court-documents.aspx

I am a member of the class. I paid $976.56 to the federal judiciary for PACER fees during the time covered by the case, April 21, 2010 to May 31, 2018. The law firm MOTLEY RICE LLC represents the class, and represents me as a member of the class.

The Complaint alleges the federal judiciary violated the E-Government Act of 2002 (DOJ)(Congress) that authorizes PACER fees "as a charge for services rendered," but "only to the extent necessary" and "to reimburse expenses in providing these services." The Complaint alleges at Paragraph 28 "…the plaintiffs believe that the number of class members is approximately 2,000,000."

Two million victims in a case against the federal judiciary headed by Chief Justice John Roberts? I believe this shows the federal judiciary needs more oversight by Congress. (House Judiciary Committee) (Congressional oversight, Wikipedia)

The Complaint [Dkt. No. 1] alleges the federal judiciary limits PACER fee waivers, and targets those who cannot pay. One example appears at paragraph 25, page 12, and alleges:

25. The other example is from five years earlier, when private collection lawyers representing the PACER Service Center brought suit in the name of the United States against "a single mother of two minor children" who had "no assets whatsoever," claiming that she owed $30,330.80 in PACER fees. See Compl. in United States v. Deanna Manning, No. 07-cv-04595, filed July 3, 2007 (C.D. Cal.); Answer, Dkt. 12, filed Oct. 16, 2007. Representing herself, the woman "admit[ted] to downloading and printing a small amount [of] material from PACER, no more than $80 worth," which "would be 1,000 pages, actually much more than she remembers printing." Answer, Dkt. 12, at 1. But she explained that "[t]here is no way she would have had enough paper and ink to print 380,000 pages as the Complaint alleges," so "[t]his must be a huge mistake." Id. She concluded: "Our great and just government would have better luck squeezing blood from a lemon than trying to get even a single dollar from this defendant who can barely scrape up enough money to feed and clothe her children." Id. at 2. Only then did the government dismiss the complaint.

The Introduction section from Dkt. No. 148, Plaintiff's Revised Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Class Settlement, paragraphs 1 and 2, state:

In the history of American litigation, this case is unique: a certified class action against the federal judiciary. The plaintiffs challenged the fees that the judiciary charges for access to records through its Public Access to Court Electronic Records system, or PACER. They sought to vindicate a single claim: that the judiciary violated the law by charging fees that exceeded the cost of providing the records. And they sought one form of relief: refunds.

After more than six years of hard-fought litigation, the plaintiffs have now secured a historic settlement under which the government must reimburse the vast majority of PACER users in full—100 cents on the dollar—for past PACER charges. The settlement creates a common fund of $125 million from which each class member will automatically be reimbursed up to $350 for any PACER fees paid between April 21, 2010, and May 31, 2018. Those who paid over $350 in fees during that period will receive their pro rata share of the remaining settlement funds. Any unclaimed funds after this initial distribution will be allocated evenly to all class members who collected their initial payment (subject to the caveat that no class member may receive more than the total fees that she paid). In addition to this remarkable monetary relief, the case has spurred the judiciary to eliminate fees for 75% of users going forward and prompted action in Congress to abolish the fees altogether.

The case settled on March 20, 2024 for $125 million; $100 million reimburses PACER users for fees they paid over eight years, and $25 million for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Awards.

On March 20, 2024, U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman entered an Opinion [Dkt. No. 169] that Granted the Plaintiff's Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement and for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Awards [Dkt. No. 158], and entered the Final Judgment and Order on Final Approval of Class Settlement, Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Awards. [Dkt. No. 170]. 

On April 30, 2024 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed appeal number 2024-1757 filed by Appellant Eric Alan Isaacson, a member of the California bar since 1985, according to his website, Law Office of Eric Alan Isaacson, https://www.ericalanisaacson.com/

The PACER Fees Class Action website, Court Documents page, shows the final appeal briefs were filed in December 2024. 

So now we await for the Federal Circuit's ruling on the appeal. Given Mr. Isaacson's position, I would expect him to appeal any adverse ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

This case was initially commenced April 21, 2016, and is still in litigation almost 10 years later.

The federal judiciary violated the E-Government Act of 2002. The federal judiciary ignored the will of The People, through their Representatives in Congress who enacted the E-Government Act of 2002. If this case ultimately goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, how can the Court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, rule on this matter given the federal judiciary's conflict of interest? And what about Chief Justice Roberts' conflict of interest as head of the Judicial Conference? Judges are not supposed to rule on their own cases. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges, Canon 3(C) Disqualification, would ordinarily apply, but not to justices of the Supreme Court. Since November 13, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court has its own Code of Conduct.

The Senate Judiciary Committee released the findings of its 20-month investigation into the ethical crisis at the Supreme Court, including the results of committee subpoenas. A Press Release December 21, 2024 is attached. Links to the full report and appendices appear below.

The federal judiciary has been criticized, and the PACER Fees Class Action is further evidence that the criticism is justified. I believe its time for Congress to abolish the fees altogether.

Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie
2801 SW College Rd, STE 3
Ocala, FL 34474-4430        

Cc: Nicole Chaney, Attorney at Law, nchaney@motleyrice.com
Motley Rice LLC, pacerlitigation@motleyrice.com

An Investigation of the Ethics Challenge at the Supreme Court - Report Only

An Investigation of the Ethics Challenge at the Supreme Court - Appendices Only

Enclosures; signed privacy act form for Neil J. Gillespie

Appendix of PACER News Stories, 2012-2016

• Nov-26-2012 TucsonSentinel.com PACER federal court record fees exceed system costs

• Dec-09-2013 25 Years Later, PACER, Electronic Filing Continue to Change Courts

• Aug-26-2014 Thousands of Electronic Case Files Lost in Transition - Law Blog - WSJ

• Aug-26-2014 Why PACER removed access to case archives of five courts - The Washington Post

• Aug-27-2014 ABA Journal Pacer deletes older case files for four appeals courts; compatibility issues cited

• Apr-21-2016 ABA Journal Pacer fees are too high, class action alleges 

• Apr-21-2016 Alliance for Justice sues the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

Whistleblower sues Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods. Lawsuit claims wrongful termination for advocating for humane inmate care

 Whistleblower sues Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods. Lawsuit claims wrongful termination for advocating for humane inmate care.
Ocala Gazette
By Caroline Brauchler
caroline@ocalagazette.com
February 5, 2025

The former medical liaison for the Marion County Jail has sued the sheriff’s office, claiming she was retaliated against after pleading for better medical care for inmates, according to court documents.

Mary Coy, a certified jail auditor, worked at the jail from February 2018 until August 2024, when she claims she was wrongfully terminated from the Marion County Sheriff’s Office for bringing forward concerns about the quality of care provided by Heart of Florida Health Center, the agency contracted for all inmate medical care.

Coy is suing Marion County Sheriff Billy Woods under the Florida Whistleblower Act. She first claimed to be the target of retaliation while still employed by the agency in October 2023.

MCSO declined to comment on the pending lawsuit.

Coy was subject to an administrative review and disciplinary counseling during her employment, in response to Coy writing letters to jail executives claiming the facility was not complying with the law and not maintaining proper standards of medical care.

The operation of the county jail has come under scrutiny in recent months following the death of inmate Scott Whitley, a diagnosed schizophrenic. Whitley died on Nov. 25, 2022, after being forcibly removed from his cell by six deputies. The medical examiner ruled the cause of death was homicide. None of the deputies involved in the incident have faced criminal charges as a result.

Whitley’s family filed, and later settled, a wrongful death suit against the MCSO. The "Gazette" sued MCSO to be allowed to share surveillance video of the incident with the public amid its reporting on conditions at the facility. A judge ordered that the publication be allowed to view the footage and report on the findings.

Within the past five years, 29 people have died within the custody of MCSO. Five of those deaths have occurred from August 2024 until the present.

Coy has been licensed as a registered nurse since 1985, according to the Florida Department of Health. Throughout her employment as the jail’s medical liaison, she consistently met and exceeded standards and was rated highly on performance evaluations, as obtained in her employee file.

Originally, it was part of Coy’s job description and duties to investigate and resolve inmate medical complaints. When Coy expressed concerns over inmates being neglected, the jail’s administration took away her ability to perform this part of her duties, as documented in her employee file.

In November 2022, Coy wrote a letter to HR Director Monica Chrisholm and Woods saying she felt a responsibility to bring forward her concerns about inmates not receiving appropriate treatment in accordance with the laws and standards she was hired to uphold.

In response to this letter, rather than investigating her concerns, the Office of Professional Standards opened an administrative investigation into Coy’s job performance, conducted by Capt. Brian Spivey.

"The conclusion of Capt. Spivey’s administrative review resulted in a change in Liaison Coy’s job duties, specifically her no longer having the responsibility to investigate and resolve inmate complaints," according to the administrative review.

A clause was also added to her job description to prevent her from being directly involved in inmate care. Coy accused the agency of illegal workplace retaliation in November 2022 for doing so. An internal MCSO investigation found her allegations to be unsubstantiated.

The head of the jail, Chief Deputy Clint Bowen, and Heart of Florida administration, including Chief Healthcare Administrator John Pearson, claimed that Coy bringing forward these concerns about inmate care was outside of her job description, and that she was not authorized to give medical advice.

Bowen is now set to retire as head of the jail and will be replaced by Charles McIntosh.

"She routinely provides her medical opinions and treatment plan suggestions to the clinical staff and that is not in the scope of her purview or responsibility as the medical services liaison," Pearson wrote to Bowen.

Records of the job description from 2007 on, however, included responsibilities for investigating and resolving inmate medical complaints, in addition to monitoring the status and delivery of the health care being provided to inmates.

It was only after Coy filed her first complaint about the quality of medical care being administered by Heart of Florida that the administrative review was conducted, and her responsibilities were amended to only include "monitoring" rather than "investigating and resolving."

Coy implored to MCSO’s Office of Professional Standards that she did not sign up to only monitor without being able to do something to intervene and ensure that inmates receive the care they are entitled to.

"I am seen as the ‘bad’ guy for trying to help human beings receive basic humane treatment. I have read in documentation many horrific things that I have reported and outlined in detail. Now my hands are tied, and I am not able to petition for inmates with obvious documented disabilities to receive priorly allowed walking aides due to their disability," Coy wrote.

Coy also described a lack of medications administered, even "something as basic as Tylenol or ibuprofen" to help inmates who are in pain.

Upon being hired for the job, Coy was required to sign a code of ethics to adhere to abide by during the course of her employment. Every employee, deputy and corrections officer signs paperwork adhering to the pledge.

In part, it reads: "I shall not engage in nor condone brutal, cruel, or inhumane treatment of others, including inmates in my care and custody."

The code of ethics outlines a "fundamental duty to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property, to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder."

During her time as the jail’s medical liaison, Coy filed monthly quality assurance reports to Bowen detailing compliance, or lack of compliance, with the jail’s policies for timely medical care. As a certified jail auditor, Coy was qualified to do so.

In October 2022, shortly before her first complaint of inadequate medical care, the quality assurance report obtained by the "Gazette" shows that medical calls were far below compliance in according to the state standard of being received within 24 hours and then triaged and assessed within 72 hours.

From a random medical sick call audit of 30 files, only 24% of calls were met within the time requirements. To meet compliance, 85% of calls need to be met within the outlined time frame, according to the October 2022 quality assurance report.

In that same October, Heart of Florida’s contract with MCSO was amended to increase the medical staff with two more medical advanced nurse practitioners, five registered nurses, two practical nurses and three medical assistants. The increase in staff was necessary due to an increase in the inmate population, according to the contract.

This increased the cost of the contract to more than $9.1 million—over a $1 million increase from what the agency agreed to originally pay for the 2022-23 fiscal year.

From the time of the internal investigation into Coy’s claims of retaliation in 2022 until July 2024, Coy complied with her new job description to only monitor inmate care, even though she continued to have serious concerns about inmate neglect.

"Then, in July 2024, (Coy) reported the sheriff’s deliberate indifference to the serious medical needs of an inmate," according to the lawsuit. "Despite her efforts to highlight deficiencies, corrective actions were continually disregarded."

Coy’s attorney claims that during that time, Coy uncovered falsified medical records for mental health inmates, including documented assessments for inmates who had never been seen or treated, according to the lawsuit.

Coy reported this to Bowen, high-ranking MCSO officials, jail administration and medical staff.

The next month, Coy was terminated from her position as jail medical liaison and escorted off the premises, according to her employment file.

Once Coy was fired, no quality assurance reports were conducted from August 2024 until the present. MCSO recently hired a new jail medical liaison, Meghan Taylor, to fill Coy’s place.

Coy’s case has been assigned to Marion County Judge Lisa Herndon. Coy has requested a trial by jury. Read more

How The Florida Whistleblower Act Protects Your Rights

112.3187 Adverse action against employee for disclosing information of specified nature prohibited; employee remedy and relief

Whistle-blower Retaliation Complaints

Florida whistleblower Act Law: Defenses, Damages, Elements & Protection

Order Dismissing Contempt Allegation And Vacating Direct Criminal Contempt Conviction of Neil J. Gillespie

Order Dismissing Contempt Allegation And Vacating Direct Criminal Contempt Conviction of Neil J. Gillespie 

On September 18, 2024 Marion County Circuit Judge Robert W. Hodges (left) entered Order Dismissing Contempt Allegation And Vacating Direct Criminal Contempt Conviction of Neil J. Gillespie in Marion County, Florida cases 2019CF4193, 2021CF0286 and 2022CF1143.

On August 2, 2024, the Fifth District Court of Appeal Reversed and Remanded the order of Marion County Circuit Judge Peter M. Brigham holding me in direct criminal contempt. The Fifth DCA ruling held in part: "We reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a hearing which adheres to the express requirements of rule 3.830." see my earlier post Marion County Circuit Judge Peter Brigham Reversed and Remanded 

The events leading to the Order of Judge Hodges dismissing the contempt allegation and vacating my conviction for direct criminal contempt are as follows:

On September 10, 2024, Marion County Administrative Judge Lisa Herndon entered Order Of Reassignment stating:

PURSUANT TO the August 2, 2024, Opinion from the Fifth District Court of Appeal, filed on August 29, 2024, this case is removed from the docket of the Honorable Peter Brigham and reassigned to the Honorable Robert Hodges for a hearing on the matter.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Ocala, Marion County, Florida, on September 10, 2024.

On September 11, 2024 Judge Hodges entered Order Scheduling Hearing Tuesday October 8, 2024 at 3:30 PM. The attached order does not mention a 3.830 hearing.

THIS CAUSE shall come before the undersigned Circuit Judge on
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 3:30 p.m., at the Marion County Judicial Center, Courtroom 3A, 110 Northwest First Avenue, Ocala, Florida.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Ocala, Marion County, Florida this
11 day of September 2024.

Oddly, on September 11, 2024, Judge Hodges entered a separate Order Setting Trial in each of three Marion County, Florida cases 2019CF4193, 2021CF0286 and 2022CF1143. The orders set a pretrial conference for pro se defendants on September 30, 2024 @ 1:00 PM, and a jury trial on October 14, 2024 @ 9:00 AM. The orders were mailed and not served on the Florida Portal.

The three orders were questionable because I pleaded no contest and adjudication was withheld in those cases. Although I was NOT GUILTY, I pleaded no contest to get out of jail in order to pay my rent, vehicle payment, and other bills. The state had revoked my bond on the grounds that the alleged direct criminal contempt was alleged "new crime" committed while released on bond. Otherwise I would have remained incarcerated for at several months, or longer, until trial. Later after I was released, I moved to withdrawal my plea of no contest for manifest injustice and other grounds. Judge Brigham denied my motion. The 5th DCA affirmed Judge Brigham (5D23-2005) and a Mandate was entered by the 5th DCA on March 18, 2024. So those cases appeared to settled. Because those cases were settled, it appeared the trial court lacked jurisdiction to conduct new trial, under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution.

So why did the trial court enter orders setting jury trial? And why did the trial court fail to serve me the orders electronically by email on the Florida Portal? I only learned about the orders by reading the public online case docket, although the orders themselves were "locked" and not viewable. To get answers, on September 12, 2024 I made a pubic records request to Gregory C. Harrell, Marion County Clerk of Court and Comptroller.

In response, I got an email from Sarah Driggers, Criminal Courts Manager, Administration. Ms. Driggers wrote in part:

I have been asked to assist with your request due to Clerk Harrell and Mr. Davis being out of the office. Please know the documents requested below are now available for viewing through our public site.

On September 14, 2024, I responded to Ms. Driggers by email:

Thank you Ms. Driggers. May I ask why Judge Hodges entered Order Setting Trial in cases 19cf4193, 21cf286 and 22cf1143? I pled no contest and adjudication was withheld in those cases. I moved to withdrawal my plea. Judge Brigham denied my motion. The 5th DCA affirmed Judge Brigham (5D23-2005) and a Mandate was entered by the 5th DCA on March 18, 2024. So those cases appear settled.

Why was the Order Setting Trial not served on the Florida Portal? As of the time of this email I have not received the Order in the mail.
Neil J. Gillespie

Generally speaking, non-receipt of an order is no excuse for failing to appear (FTA). The court will usually issue an arrest warrant, also called a "pickup order" where the sheriff or police will place the FTA person under arrest, transport them to jail, where the FTA person becomes incarcerated, held on no bond, until the court can schedule a hearing.

On September 16, 2024, I got a response, not from Ms. Driggers, but from Rob Davis, General Counsel to Clerk Harrell. Mr. Davis wrote in part:

Good afternoon Mr. Gillespie,
Thank you for your email. I wanted to acknowledge receipt and let
you know that I will respond in greater detail after further review.
Take care,
Rob Davis

Without the details, on September 18, 2024 @7:56 AM, I emailed the Clerk of the Appellate Court, Sandra Williams, Clerk of the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal.

Sandra Williams
Clerk of the Court
Fifth District Court of Appeal
300 S Beach St
Daytona Beach, FL 32114-5002
Office: 386-947-1530
Email: williamsa@flcourts.org

RE: Opinion-Disposition 5D2023-0888

Dear Clerk Williams:

Good morning. On August 2, 2024, the Fifth District Court of Appeal Reversed and Remanded the order of Judge Brigham holding me in direct criminal contempt. The ruling held in part: "We reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a hearing which adheres to the express requirements of rule 3.830."

On September 10, 2024 Judge Robert Hodges was reassigned to my criminal cases.

On September 11, 2024 Judge Hodges entered Order Scheduling Hearing Tuesday October 8, 2024 at 3:30 PM. The attached order does not mention a 3.830 hearing.

On September 11, 2024 Judge Hodges entered Order Setting Trial in cases 19cf4193, 21cf286 and 22cf1143. The order sets a pretrial conference for pro se defendants on September 30, 2024 @ 1:00 PM, and a jury trial on October 14, 2024 @ 9:00 AM. The orders were mailed and not served on the Florida Portal.

I pled no contest and adjudication was withheld in those cases. I moved to withdrawal my plea for manifest injustice and other grounds. Judge Brigham denied my motion. The 5th DCA affirmed Judge Brigham (5D23-2005) and a Mandate was entered by the 5th DCA on March 18, 2024. So those cases appear settled. Because those cases are settled, it appears the trial court lacks jurisdiction to conduct new trials. So why has the trial court entered orders setting jury trial?

Last week I asked the Marion County Clerk's office this question, but do not yet have an answer. Furthermore, last year in each case I filed notice of prosecutorial misconduct. A reasonable person viewing this matter could reasonably conclude that I cannot get a fair hearing or trial in the Fifth Judicial Circuit with State Attorney William Gladson.

Copies of the orders are attached. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
(Signature block omitted)

Cc: Office of the Attorney General [Ashley Moody]
444 Seabreeze Blvd.
5th Floor
Daytona Beach, FL 32118
crimappdab@myfloridalegal.com

About a half-hour later, September 18, 2024, Judge Hodges entered Order Vacating Order Setting Trail in each case, served on the Florida Portal.

By the end of the day on September 18, 2024, Judge Hodges entered Order Dismissing Contempt Allegation And Vacating Direct Criminal Contempt Conviction of Neil J. Gillespie in Marion County, Florida cases 2019CF4193, 2021CF0286 and 2022CF1143.

A composite document with the foregoing is posted on Scribd.

Judge Hodges was appointed to serve as Circuit Judge in 2007 by Former Governor Charlie Christ. Hodges previously served as an Assistant State Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit. Judge Peter Brigham previously served as an Assistant State Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit. Many judges are former prosecutors.

Catholic Charities Eligibility Determination Services

Catholic Charities Eligibility Determination Services

Harold called me today (Sunday Dec-29-2024) and said he was being discharged today from Ocala Regional Hospital (HCA) but without having kidney dialysis. The Florida Department of Health (DOH) website says county health departments provide medical care and case management to anyone who is eligible. Catholic Charities provides Eligibility Determination Services. I have advocated for Harold with the health department since September 15, 2024, and again yesterday. 

Still no word from Marissa Duquette, General Counsel for the Marion County Sheriff’s Office, on the alleged "blockage in the county" preventing Harold from getting help. However I did hear from the office of U.S. Congresswoman Kat Cammack; as a legislator she cannot help "due to the principle of separation of powers". So we are all at the mercy of a corrupt justice system. President-elect Donald Trump knows about our corrupt justice system. So does President Biden, who pardoned his own son in part due to lawfare. 

A number of Americans believe the United States is a Christian nation. The good book has numerous examples of Jesus Christ healing the sick. So why can it be so difficult for Americans to get healthcare? Jesus cured a blind man who was uninsured. Jesus cured ten lepers without a co-payment. Jesus cured a paralytic without prior authorization. Maybe Jesus was sending a message.

I fund Justice Network from my Social Security retirement income. I welcome financial support through PayPal. Also, if anyone has a washing machine they don't need, I can pick it up for the landlady at Harold's group home. Wishing you and your family a Happy New Year. Neil Gillespie 

Marion County Circuit Judge Peter Brigham Reversed and Remanded

Fifth District Court of Appeal, State of Florida 

Neil Joseph Gillespie, 

Appellant,

v. 

State of Florida, 

Appellee.

Case No. 5D2023-0888; Lt Case Nos. 2022-CF-1143, 2021-CF-0286, 2021-CF-4193
REVERSED AND REMANDED.

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County. Peter M. Brigham, Judge.

Neil Joseph Gillespie, Ocala, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

August 2, 2024

PER CURIAM. 

Neil Joseph Gillespie ("Gillespie") Gillespie appeals his conviction of direct criminal contempt. Because the trial court failed to comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830 during the contempt hearing, we reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a hearing in accordance with rule 3.830

Facts 

On January 3, 2023, Gillespie appeared pro se for a hearing in his pending criminal cases. During a discussion regarding a proposed order, Gillespie allegedly "yelled" at the court.[fn1] The court admonished Gillespie for this conduct, at which point Gillespie stated that because of a speech impairment he has a hard time projecting his voice. [fn1] While the written transcript was provided on appeal, the audio recording was not.

Twenty-two days later, on January 25, 2023, Gillespie appeared for a scheduled pretrial conference. After finishing the conference, the court brought up Gillespie "yelling" during the January 3, 2023 hearing and indicated that it was going to hold him in contempt. Although there was then some discussion between Gillespie and the court, the court neither "inquire[d] as to whether [Gillespie] ha[d] any cause to show why he . . . should not be adjudged guilty of contempt by the court and sentenced therefor" nor "provide[d] [Gillespie] the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances." See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.830. Ultimately, the court pronounced Gillespie guilty of criminal contempt and sentenced him to thirty days in jail.

Analysis 

"The rules of criminal contempt must be strictly followed so as to protect the due process rights of the defendant." M.J. v. State, 202 So. 3d 112, 113 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (quoting State v. Diaz de la Portilla, 177 So. 3d 965, 973 (Fla. 2015)). Although Gillespie did not object to the trial court’s failure to scrupulously follow the requirements of rule 3.830, the trial court’s failure to do so constitutes fundamental error. As we explained in Schoenwalder v. State, 70 So. 3d 745, 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011):

Before being adjudicated guilty of his contemptible behavior, Petitioner was entitled to "the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances." Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.830. Petitioner did not receive this opportunity. Beyond a perfunctory request whether there was just cause not to hold Petitioner in contempt, the trial court did not provide Petitioner with the opportunity to present evidence of excusing or mitigating circumstances. A trial court’s failure to afford a defendant this opportunity constitutes fundamental error.

(footnote omitted) (citing Garrett v. State, 876 So.2d 24 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)); see also Hutcheson v. State, 903 So. 2d 1060, 1062 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) ("‘The provisions of rule 3.830 define the essence of due process in criminal contempt proceedings and must be scrupulously followed.’ . . . [T]he failure to follow the procedural requirements in contempt proceedings is fundamental error." (quoting Keeton v. Bryant, 877 So. 2d 922, 926 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004))).

Conclusion

We reverse and remand for the trial court to hold a hearing which adheres to the express requirements of rule 3.830. See Swain v. State, 226 So. 3d 250, 252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) ("The proper remedy for a trial court’s failure to strictly adhere to the requirements of rule 3.830 is a new hearing at which the rule will be followed." (citing Golant v. State, 202 So. 3d 946, 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016))). In an abundance of caution, and because the trial judge has already held Gillespie in contempt, a different judge shall be assigned to the case on remand. See Osteen v. State, 12 So. 3d 927, 929 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ("Because [the trial judge] has already ruled that Osteen’s claim is without merit and a reasonable person in Osteen’s position might well fear that [the trial judge] would not fairly and impartially determine this claim, a different judge shall be assigned to the case on remand.").

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MAKAR and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
KILBANE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part, with opinion.

Christmas Day update for Harold Minnis

Christmas Day update for Harold Minnis.

Harold is back in the hospital, but at least now there is an explanation for his situation. Harold is unable to obtain SSI and Medicaid benefits because Marion County is not showing his status as released from custody, according to a social worker I spoke with at the hospital. Persons held in custody cannot obtain outside benefits. The social worker told me on Monday that there is a "blockage in the county", which is also preventing the Marion County Health Department from providing services to Harold. This helps explain why lawyers I contacted cannot help Harold, including Morgan & Morgan of Ocala, and Johnnie Chalkley, a referral from The Florida Bar Lawyer Referral Service. Jayme Cassidy of the Florida Bar Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services said contact Community Legal Services for pro bono legal services. Harold was threatened with eviction for non-payment of rent. Harold's landlady is a kind and understanding person who may have been misled by the Marion County Sheriff's Office. The Sheriff's Office allegedly to her that Harold could be evicted without notice. But the social worker says no, Harold must be served with a 30 day eviction notice. Funny how none of the lawyers could help. So Harold has at least another 30 days in his home, which is a group home with several other men. I promised Harold's landlady I would get a washing machine to replace one that broke. Eventually Harold plans to move to assisted living. A flight of stairs at his current home is a hazard for Harold.   

On Monday I emailed Marissa Duquette, General Counsel for the Marion County Sheriff’s Office, " please immediately remove the blockage in the county that is violating Mr. Minnis' civil rights and preventing him from receiving government services." I provided a copy of my email to Hallie Mallard, a Constituent Advocate & Field Rep. for U.S. Congresswoman Kat Cammack. "Ms. Mallard, please bring this situation to the attention of Congresswoman Cammack. Official corruption is rampant in Marion County Florida."

Still no word from the DaVita Ocala-west Florida Regional Kidney Center, and its failure to provide transportation for Harold to get life-saving Kidney dialysis. DaVita has failed to respond to multiple phone calls and emails. So Harold is back in the hospital.

I fund Justice Network from my Social Security retirement income. I would welcome any financial support through PayPal or Zelle. Also, if anyone has a washing machine they don't need, I can pick it up for Harold's landlady. Thank you. Wishing you and your family Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Neil Gillespie. 

DaVita Ocala-west Florida Regional Kidney Center Failure To Provide Transportation

DaVita Ocala-west Florida Regional Kidney Center Failure To Provide Transportation

Harold Minnis is a person whom I help without charge. Harold has been hospitalized several times recently. On November 27, 2024 I spoke with "Sarah" at the DaVita Ocala Regional Kidney Center-west about transportation for Harold so he can get kidney dialysis three times a week. I spoke with Sarah in person at DaVita Ocala, 8585 SW Highway 200, Ocala, Florida. Sarah told me DaVita Ocala contracts with a ride service for dialysis transport. Harold is an elderly man who uses a wheelchair and does not drive but must get to DaVita Ocala three time a week for life-saving kidney dialysis. There is no public transportation where Harold lives in Dunnellon on an unpaved road. As of today Harold still does not have transportation. Harold has to get dialysis tomorrow morning, Monday December 16, 2024. Previously I called the DaVita corporate office in Malvern, PA. DaVita corporate said to call 911 for an ambulance if DaVita Ocala does not provide transportation. No wonder healthcare in America costs so much. Facebook link

Harold is from Umatilla, Florida, but now lives in Dunnellon. Harold would like to see his old friend Ruby but lost contact. If anyone knows Harold or Ruby, please let me know. Thank you.

"We Have Lost All Credibility": Hala Rharrit on Quitting State Dept. & Ending Complicity in Gaza

 

"We Have Lost All Credibility": Hala Rharrit on Quitting State Dept. & Ending Complicity in Gaza, Democracy Now YouTube video

As human rights groups continue to call out war crimes committed by the Israeli military, we speak to the only U.S. diplomat to publicly resign from the Biden administration over its policy on Israel. We first spoke to Hala Rharrit when she resigned from the State Department in April, citing the illegal and deceptive nature of U.S. policy in the Middle East. "We continue to willfully violate laws so that we surge U.S. military assistance to Israel," she says after more than a year of Israel's war on Gaza. Rharrit says she found the Biden administration unmovable in its "counterproductive policy," which she believes has gravely harmed U.S. interests in the Middle East. "We are going to feel the repercussions of that for years, decades, generations."

Follow Hala Rharrit on Instagram:   /hala_rharrit_official

 

Israel Gaza war: History of the conflict explained, BBC

The Palestinian militant group Hamas launched an unprecedented assault on Israel on 7 October, with hundreds of gunmen infiltrating communities near the Gaza Strip. About 1,200 people were killed, and more than 250 were taken to Gaza as hostages, according to Israeli tallies. More than 33,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed in air and artillery strikes carried out by the Israeli military in response, Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry says. Read more

 

List of US officials who resigned over Biden's support for Israel in Gaza war. Wikipedia article

A small number of US staff, including officials who worked closely on the arms trade and human rights policy, have resigned over the Biden administration's continued arms transfers to Israel for its war in Gaza.[1] A group of staff members resigned amidst anger in the country over Biden's support for Israel, despite rising casualties in the Gaza Strip as Israeli forces continue to commit genocide against Palestinians in the territory.[2]

In a joint statement entitled "Service in Dissent", the resigned officials wrote that "America's diplomatic cover for, and continuous flow of arms to, Israel has ensured our undeniable complicity in the killings and forced starvation of a besieged Palestinian population in Gaza. This is not only morally reprehensible and in clear violation of international humanitarian law and U.S. laws, but it has also put a target on America’s back."[3][4] Resigned officials who spoke to CNN stated that unnamed and non-confirmed former colleagues felt the same way but could not afford to resign.[3] The officials included Lily Greenberg Call, Harrison Mann, Hala Rharrit, Maryam Hassanein, Mohammed Abu Hashem, Riley Livermore, Alexander Smith, Stacy Gilbert, Anna Del Castillo, Annelle Sheline, Tariq Habash, Josh Paul, and Andrew Miller.[5] Read more

The Deep State Hiding in Plain Sight

The Deep State Hiding in Plain Sight
Moyers & Company YouTube Channel

Mike Lofgren, a congressional staff member for 28 years, joins Bill Moyers to talk about what he calls Washington's "Deep State," in which elected and unelected figures collude to protect and serve powerful vested interests. "It is how we had deregulation, financialization of the economy, the Wall Street bust, the erosion or our civil liberties and perpetual war," Lofgren tells Moyers.

The Deep State, by Mike Lofgren
The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government, Penguin Random House. Mike Lofgren, Wikipedia