'Your Life is Not Worthy': Reprimand for Florida Judge Over Treatment of Defendants
Brevard Circuit Judge Robin C. Lemonidis will receive a public reprimand for being intemperate in one trial and making inappropriate comments to a defendant in a sentencing colloquy.
November 14, 2019 at 04:06 PM
4 minute read
The Florida Supreme Court accepted a recommendation from the Judicial Qualifications Commission Thursday to publicly reprimand Brevard Circuit Judge Robin C. Lemonidis over her perceived bias against defendants in two felony criminal cases.
When a defense attorney in one trial, State v. Skyler Francis, failed to address participants by their surnames, Lemonidis's facial expressions, tone and demeanor toward the attorney and his client grew adversarial. Lemonidis "repeatedly and loudly struck her gavel" while admonishing the defense on at least five separate occasions, according to Thursday's ruling.
"Judge Lemonidis behaved similarly in her interactions with witnesses and others involved in the proceedings, 'at times appearing openly annoyed … by the person she was addressing,'" the ruling said.
The high court expressed concern about how the judge's behavior affected jurors.
"Like the JQC, we are particularly concerned by 'Judge Lemonidis's failure to exercise self control' during the Francis trial after she was informed that a juror had commented on her perceived dislike of defense counsel," the per curiam ruling said.
In the second case, State v. Anthony Welch, the defendant was facing the death penalty in a retrial of the penalty phase, after pleading guilty to two counts of first-degree murder. After listening to impact statements from victims' family members, Lemonidis told the defendant she "cannot disagree with a single thing" one person said, and that the speakers were "far more gracious soul[s] than a person like you deserves."
Florida Supreme Court justices found Lemonidis then compromised the integrity of the judiciary by voicing a desire to see the defendant fight for his life or die in prison.
"And that is something you're going to get to ponder for the rest of your miserable life. There is a Chinese proverb, do good, reap good, do evil, reap evil—which section will you sit in, sir? There's no doubt in my mind. And I tend to agree that the outcome might have been different had this been three years ago,"Lemonidis said, according to Thursday's ruling. "I hope you see the [victim's] faces on every single face you see. … The collateral damage that you have caused, sir, is immeasurable and your life is not worthy of what you have done to these people. I do hope you do fight for your life every minute of every day. And that would be the only reason that I would hope your life is any longer than six weeks."
The JQC found that was a violation of Judicial Canons 1, 2A, 3B(4) and 3B(5), which govern integrity and independence of the judiciary, the appearance of impropriety and adjudicative responsibilities.
"As observed by the JQC, 'it is essential' that judges refrain from 'degrad[ing] the solemnity of proceedings by casting insults and abuse upon litigants,' " the ruling said.
Lemonidis reached a stipulation with the JQC in August, agreeing to the reprimand and stress management counseling. The judge did not contest the JQC's findings and has admitted her conduct was inappropriate and intemperate.
Lemonidis and her attorney Warren Lindsey of Lindsey & Ferry in Winter Park did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.
JQC General Counsel Alexander Williams and Palm Beach Circuit Judge Krista Marx brought the case for the JQC.
The reprimand is scheduled for 9 a.m. on Feb. 5, 2020.
|Read the ruling:
More discipline cases:
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 AllBenworth Accused of Predatory Tactics in Foreclosure Dispute as Elderly Defendant's Health Deteriorates
4 minute read'Get Rid of the Men': Employer Accused of Discrimination
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law Leaders Get Real on Business Impact of Election Results
- 2Survival Guide for Executives and Board Members: 4 Steps to Safeguard Against Individual Liability for Data Security Failures
- 3Growing Referral Network, Alternative Fees Have This Ex-Big Law’s Atty’s Bankruptcy Practice Soaring
- 4High-Flying Genetics Testing Firm GeneDx Hires Ex-Zoetis GC as Legal Chief
- 5Manhattan Prosecutors Say They Will Oppose Efforts by Trump Legal Team to Dismiss Case
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