Amendment 6 Bundles Judges' Retirement Age With Victims' Rights on Nov. 6 Ballot
According to Miami-based criminal defense lawyer Mark Eiglarsh and Melba Pearson, deputy director of the ACLU of Florida, voters should reject Amendment 6. Although the measure purports to extend the “rights of crime victims,” both Eiglarsh and Pearson say it will only undermine protections already enshrined in the Florida Constitution.
November 02, 2018 at 06:45 PM
6 minute read
Miami lawyers have taken issue with a bundled amendment on the Florida ballot.
Along with a controversial proposal for victim's rights, Amendment 6 also contains language that would raise the mandatory retirement age for Florida judges from 70 to 75. It would also assign responsibility to judges for determining if state agencies correctly interpreted the law.
Some in the Miami legal community say the three issues, bundled by the Florida Constitution Revision Commission, are totally unrelated.
Among those taking notes is Melba Pearson, deputy director for the ACLU of Florida, who says the amendment places voters in an unenviable position.
“Voters are forced to pick between the lesser of three evils,” Pearson said. “In our opinion, that's completely wrong. Voters should be able to let their voices be heard on one topic.”
|'Not Opposed' to Retirement Age Proposal
|What's Inside Amendment 6
Creates constitutional rights for victims of crime; requires courts to facilitate victims' rights;Authorizes victims to enforce their rights throughout criminal and juvenile justice processes;Requires judges and hearing officers to independently interpret statutes and rules rather than deferring to government agency's interpretation;Raises mandatory retirement age of state justices and judges from 70 to 75;Deletes authorization to complete judicial term if half of term has been served by retirement age.Pearson's opposition to the amendment is shared by Miami-based criminal defense attorney Mark Eiglarsh.
“I'm opposed to it overall because of how it may interfere with my client's rights, but I'm not opposed with raising the retirement age,” Eiglarsh said. “There are way too many phenomenal judges who are serving this community at 70. They shouldn't be forced to retire when they could still be of tremendous service to the community. As the average life expectancy increases, so should the age of retirement.”
Despite enthusiasm for separate parts of the amendment, both Pearson and Eiglarsh are opposed to it overall.
The victim's rights portion of Amendment 6 is the latest iteration in a spate of similar proposals to appear on state ballots in recent years. Modeled after the California Victims Bill Act of 2008, Amendment 6 is said to empower crime victims by enshrining their right to be heard at public trial. The proposal also contains language protecting victims from harassment and intimidation in addition to empowering them to demand speedy trials.
Pearson says the amendment is not only redundant to pre-existing protections in the Florida Constitution, but if passed, it would serve to create several legal headaches.
“The Florida Constitution in Article 1 provides victims three things. It provides them the right to be heard, the right to be informed and the right to be present at all stages of a criminal proceeding,” Pearson told the Daily Business Review, adding that Florida is ahead of most states with regards to legal protections for victims.
According to Pearson, who served as a Miami-Dade prosecutor for 16 years, the passage of Amendment 6 would erode pre-existing protections for those accused of a crime.
“There is already a provision in our constitution where it says victims have rights to the extent that it does not erode or infringe on the rights of the defendant,” she said. “That provision would be struck as part of Amendment 6.”
Eiglarsh echoed several of Pearson's fears.
“My greatest concern with Amendment 6 is that it would delete language from the Florida Constitution that currently guarantees that the constitutional rights of the accused shall not be interfered with,” he said. “While I have always been a staunch supporter of victim's rights, I don't believe it should ever be at the expense of the rights of the accused to obtain due process.”
|State Attorney Endorsement
But proponents disagree. They argue that the amendment would enable victims to have a more active role in the legal process heretofore denied to them.
The amendment is known as Marsy's Law, named for victim's rights donor and advocate Henry Nicholas' sister who was murdered in 1983.
Among its high-level supporters is Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle, quoted in the Miami New Times as referring to the measure as “an opportunity for every Floridian to stand up to say that victims have rights and that they should be protected, they should be in our constitution.”
But both Pearson and Eiglarsh expressed reservations about the amendment's planned changes to the speed of court proceedings.
“The proposed amendment reduces the amount of time in which you can file an appeal postconviction,” Pearson said. “It reduces it to two years for a noncapital, nondeath penalty case and five years for a death penalty case.”
This could have significant fallout, according to Pearson.
“Florida leads the country in exonerations from death row,” she said. ”We've had 27 exonerations. The majority of those people would've been wrongfully executed if this amendment was in place. Exonerating evidence doesn't come out in year one. It comes out many years later. So if you cap it at five years you have someone who could be potentially wrongfully executed.”
Eiglarsh agreed the measure would leave defendants insufficient time to prepare for trial. And both litigators claim the amendment would add protections for corporations.
The official website for Amendment 6 lists Gov. Rick Scott, Attorney General Pam Bondi and gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis as supporters of the initiative.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllShaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
5 minute readBenworth Accused of Predatory Tactics in Foreclosure Dispute as Elderly Defendant's Health Deteriorates
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Senators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anti-Competitive Practices, Fees
- 2Deal Watch: Gibson Dunn, V&E, Kirkland Lead Big Energy Deals in Another Strong Week in Transactions
- 3Advisory Opinion Offers 'Road Map' for Judges Defending Against Campaign Attacks
- 4Commencement of Child Victims Act at Heart of Federal Question Posed to NY's Top Court
- 5Bolstering Southern California Presence, Sidley Austin Settles Into Revitalized Downtown LA Office
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250