Judge Boyce reminded the court that this case was capital murder case, and it is incredibly serious.
Boyce said that said his staff attorney was notified on March 31, Easter Sunday, that the motion was had been filed. He said that was the day before they started the Voir dire. Boyce said the staff attorney contacted the court and said that an emergency was happening with the case and that emergency was a motion to continue the trial. Boyce said that this created a tremendous amount of quick response required by the court, staff, clerks. prosecutors and the defense.
Boyce said that pleading was entitled "Motion to intervene and to continue trial in these proceedings." Boyce said it was filed by Mr. Ratliff on his official office letterhead and signed by Mr. Ratliff as attorney for the defendant. Boyce said that “motion,” “continue,” “proceedings” were misspelled.
Boyce said, "When I reviewed this, I was angry then and I think I’m angrier now about what you did.”
Boyce said that Ratliff must explain how his pleading complied with rule 11, which governs attorneys and the representations they make.
Boyce said he had questions for Ratliff. He said that while he appreciated the time and research Ratliff had put into the case, Ratliff is not the defendant, state, prosecutor or the defense attorney. Boyce said that Ratliff was an attorney that filed something asking him to stop the trial with no legal standing to do that. He said that he wanted to give Ratliff an opportunity to explain.
Ratliff's attorney, Bartlett, claimed that he was told by Boyce’s clerk two days ago that he could represent his client. Bartlet said that Boyce was in contempt. Boyce said that he was not in contempt. Boyce said Barlett could not argue the motion as his client, an attorney, filed the motion. Boyce said he had questions for Ratliff, not his attorney. Boyce said that he is the judge. He said that with all due respect to Barlett, he appreciated the fact that he wanted to represent his client. Boyce said that Barlett talked to his client before, and he can talk to him after, but the questions he has on rule 11 related directly to the pleading that Ratliff filed as a licensed attorney in the case. Boyce said that he has the right to ask Ratliff about the pleading that he filed. Boyce told Barlett that he could take a moment to consult with him, but he wasn't going to be allowed to argue the merits. Bartlett said he would consult with Ratliff.
Ratliff said he was willing to answer Boyce’s questions. Boyce said that Ratliff filed the wrong case number. Boyce asked why he entitled himself as attorney for the defendant three different places. Ratliff said that was an error because it was in his template. Boyce asked who he was the attorney for. Ratliff said that it should have been signed “citizen.”
Ratliff said he was looking for immediate relief of concerns he had about the case. Boyce asked why he was doing it at almost midnight on a Friday night. Boyce said that according to Ratliff's content he has known about this for a long time. Ratliff said that was correct. Boyce asked him why he was doing it then. Ratliff said he wanted to do something to slow it down. Boyce asked, "Trial is scheduled for how many years and you wanted to slow it down the day before it started?"
Ratliff said he also received calls from Prior asking for help. Boyce asked if he was ever retained by Prior or had made a plea for the defendant. Ratliff said no.
Ratliff confirmed that he filed the pleading without permission of the defendant or his counsel.
Boyce said that Ratliff called himself an intervener. Boyce asked on what basis he had to intervene. Ratliff said he stated in the brief why he wanted to intervene. Boyce asked if Ratliff was intervening as a citizen at large not attorney Ratliff. Ratliff answered that it is semantics. Boyce chuckled and said "Oh Boy, let me stop you right there. It's absolutely not." He said that an attorney filing something with their bar number is completely different then a citizen filing something to the court.
Boyce said that Ratliff's intent to intervene whether it was as a citizen or as an attorney there is a law that prevents intervention in a criminal case by a third party. Boyce then asked what right Ratliff has to intervene as an attorney or a citizen. Ratliff said according to Idaho law, he can intervene. Boyce asked Ratliff what he was going to do in the case if he intervened. Ratliff said that he had hoped he would have had a hearing in front of Boyce before the trial started.
Ratliff explained that he was nervous, and it was late at night when he filed his motion and that his why he had all the typos and mistakes.
Boyce said this was a frivolous filing that cost time, effort and real loss for the attorneys and the court. Boyce said he was going to ask defense and prosecution to itemize time spent on this pleading and Ratliff would pay attorney's fees for both sides. He also said that the court would also itemize billing time. Boyce said that he was handing down a sanction that Ratliff pay the fees.
Bartlett asked Boyce to address their written filing. Boyce said he can ask but he may not get them. Bartlett asked to talk to the judge and Boyce said, “I’m done with this issue, and I’m done wasting time on this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment