United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit: Odulene Dormescar v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 10-15822, and Anthony John Ponticelli v. Sec’y, Florida Dept. of Corrections, No. 11-1966
The United States Court of Appeals has published a couple of interesting opinions in the last few days. The first, Odulene Dormescar v. U.S. Attorney General, No. 10-15822, concerns the removal of a person convicted of an aggravated felony. The opinion is a bit long (31 pages), but if you are a criminal defense lawyer who deals with immigration issues, it’s probably a good idea to take a few minutes and review the opinion.
The second opinion is also long (over 70 pages), but still quite interesting in that the opinion contains a partial dissent, which is a rarity in the Eleventh Circuit. In Anthony John Ponticelli v. Sec’y, Florida Dept. of Corrections, No. 11-11966, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus for death row inmate Ponticelli. For those criminal defense and criminal appeals lawyers who handle habeas petitions in death cases, this might be a good opinion to review. After all, it’s not everyday that you get to read an Eleventh Circuit opinion where at least one of the Judges finds that the Florida Supreme Court misapplied Strickland, and that habeas relief should have been granted. Judge Martin’s partial dissent begins at page 72.
Finally, for those of you who are interested in following the criminal defense bar’s attempts to challenge S.B. 1960, I have heard that the docket for the case in Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal is 3D12-2034. The style of the case is David S. Markus v. Hon. Joel H. Brown.