Runner-Up Lawyer of the Day: Ben Kuehne
On a normal day, being charged in a federal indictment with laundering drug money would be enough to get you named ATL's Lawyer of the Day. But allegations of going down on 15-year-old boys are tough to top.
Nevertheless, Ben Kuehne deserves a shout-out in these pages. From the Daily Business Review:
High-profile Miami lawyer Ben Kuehne was charged in a federal indictment unsealed today with laundering drug money that went to celebrity lawyer Roy Black to defend Colombian cocaine kingpin Fabio Ochoa.
Kuehne, who represented Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election and an array of liberal causes, made his first appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen Brown this morning on a charge of money laundering, which carries a maximum 20-year sentence. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke.
“I am completely innocent of these allegations,” Kuehne told Brown.
Normally one might say, "If you say so." But Kuehne is an exceedingly well-regarded lawyer in Miami, with many defenders. The government case is being greeted with skepticism in some quarters (another reason Kuehne won't be our Lawyer of the Day).
Read more, after the jump.
Writes lawyer/blogger David Markus:
Ben Kuehne, one of the pillars of this community, was indicted on money laundering charges. The government's theory of prosecution is outrageous. According to Jay Weaver's article:"Justice Department officials allege that Kuehne broke the law in 2002-03 when he vouched for millions paid by one-time Medellín drug lord Fabio Ochoa Vasquez to his high-profile trial attorney, Roy Black."
"Kuehne's research gave Black the confidence -- in the form of legal opinion letters -- to accept payments totaling $3.7 million in fees and $1.3 million in expenses from Ochoa, according to several sources. Kuehne earned a portion of the expense payments -- $220,000 to $260,000 -- from Black for vetting Ochoa's payments...."
This means that Ben had to have knowingly and willfully lied to Roy when telling him that the fee was okay. But what motive would Ben have for doing this? The money certainly wasn't enough to risk all of this. And Ben Kuehne of all people wouldn't have done these things for a million dollars. He's as ethical a person and lawyer as I know.
So what's up with this indictment? Here's Markus's theory:
We all know the real reason for this prosecution -- to discourage lawyers from taking these kinds of cases.I went to court to support Ben. Half of the legal community was there to show their support. (He was released on a $250,000 personal surety bond.)
Watching this unfold really stuck in my gut. I am still in disbelief. I actually had a case in the past with the lead prosecutor from DOJ. I went up to him to say hello and he exclaimed without prompting: "This is a wonderful day for the government." The comment was unnecessary and it sickened me.
That does seem a trifle d-baggish gratuitous. It would probably be more prudent to wait for a conviction before crowing like that -- especially to a blogger.
Federal Court: Miami lawyer charged in unsealed indictment [Daily Business Review]
Sad day [Southern District of Florida Blog]
Top lawyer faces money-laundering charges [Miami Herald via WSJ Law Blog]
(26) Comments
That's one way to dampen the market for defense attorneys. Maybe DOJ would just prefer we give up the adversarial system all together.
And? Seems to me that the lawyer of the day should be the DOJ prosecutor who is going after defense lawyers for absolutely nothing.
THE OCHOAS ARE NO JOKE, BUT THIS INDICTMENT IS. TO LEARN UP ON THE OCHOAS AND THEIR EMPIRE IN MIAMI DURING THE SEVENTIES AND EIGHTIES, RENT THE DOCUMENTARY "COCAINE COWBOYS."
If only it was judge Coke instead of Cooke...
Hmm, looks like Bush/Cheney have a few scores to settle before they give up the reins of power they've so tightly held for 8 years...looks like they have loooooong memories too.
Or is this "lawyer suppression" (rather than voter suppression) for the party, in case FL is tight in '08? Obama/Hillary can't very well hire an attorney who has been indicted on drug money laundering charges, now can they?
too bad malicious prosecution is such a difficult case to stick on a prosecutor . . .
Anybody remember that Miami Vice episode where the criminal defense lawyer faked his own death and then Crockett caught up to him on a beach at the end of the show and didn't turn him in?
Just sayin'
From the outside, this smells a lot like selective prosecution. Have other lawyers who represented big drug defendants been charged?
Surprised the Bush administration didn't water board him for trying to steal their election like that
Taking a contingency fee for a legal opinion? About a gangsters ill gotten cash?
He may be ethical, but how f%$king stupid is this guy? If stupidity is a crime, then I find him Guiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilty!
Welcome to Patriot Act land.
Attorneys are "gatekeepers" and as such get to take it in the rear from DOJ. At least DOJ should have the courtesy to do as they do with big banking institutions when they rap e them in the bupkus, let them pay a fine and submit to some spot checks or have a person in charge of making sure the attorney complies.
COCAINE COWBOYS
is a great film.
He may be innocent of the alleged crime, but he's guilty of having a bow tie that is 15-20% too large.
AAG of the DOJ Criminal Division, her name tops the signatures in the indictment...
Alice S. Fisher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_S._Fisher
Partisan or not?
So the DOJ prosecutes the most powerful plaintiff's law firm, Milberg Weiss, based on a questionable legal theory. And they prosecute the highest profile civil rights attorney in Los Angeles, Stephen Yagman. And they prosecute one of the most prominent plaintiff's lawyers in the country, Dicky Scruggs. Now they indict a Democratic lawyer on flimsy charges. Are we surprised?
AAG of the DOJ Criminal Division, her name tops the signatures in the indictment...
Alice S. Fisher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_S._Fisher
Partisan or not?
____________________
I'd bang her. I know that wasn't the question, but still.
No, we're not surprised that democrats are crooks.
Did she go to Regent?
3:19 - Add to that list prominent plaintiff's attorney Geoffrey Fieger, currently under indictment in the Eastern District of Michigan in connection with with his support of John Edwards in 2004.
I think Markus's analysis is spot-on when he theorizes DOJ is trying to dissuade skilled lawyers from taking high-end criminal defense cases.
Because attorneys certainly have better things to do than defend criminals. After all, if they've been indicted it's because they're guilty.
And as we know, the government is always honest, pure, forthright, trustworthy, and on the side of the angels. Ask Louie Greco and Henry Tameleo, I'm sure they'd agree.
-- ET!
Everything old is new again. Back in the last Drug War frenzy, they were using civil-forfeiture laws to seize accused persons' bank accounts and assets so they couldn't hire lawyers. Can't afford a lawyer? Guess you can't fight this forfeiture action then, and Uncle Sam thanks you for your generous donation.
The criminal defense attorney is the constitutionally contemplated role of an attorney- all you other douchebags are simply business people who happen to have a JD. BIG law sucks ass and is not what the founding fathers intended for the role of counsel- fucK YOU ALL.
"And as we know, the government is always honest, pure, forthright, trustworthy, and on the side of the angels. Ask Louie Greco and Henry Tameleo, I'm sure they'd agree."
Um yeah, just like all defense attorneys are fine upstanding citizens too, eh?
Maybe he's guilty.
I stumped my toe, it must be GW's fault!
Idiots.
12: 53: And guess who lives in a bigger house.
The local US Attorney's office, and those who lead it, have shown their true colors - they are both hypocritical and timid.
Sure Mr. Acosta can march into a press conference and announce the indictment of true criminals, reaping the "glory" from the act.
But, when it came time to tell justice that what they were alleging was totally out of character to Mr. Kuehne, and that any benefit of doubt should be given to his benefit, where were Mr. Acosta and other prosecutors to say that every thing they know about the man and his reputation lend to a different conclusion than indictment?
The office took the easiest path and "flew below the radar" both trying to avoid having to stand up to DOJ to make sure justice is done; and, tried to escape the blame of those in our community who rightfully question the total lack in judgment in indicting Ben.
Sure, the US Attorney for the SD of Fla's name may not be on the indictment, but he is just as guilty for this unfolding travesty as those whose name is on the indictment.
If this not be the case, if there were back room discussions in which the SD office truly tried to avert this injustice, then I hope those facts come to light. I would prefer to believe our public officials have good moral fiber.
Or perhaps the U.S. Attorney's office is out because during meetings with Kuehne, people employed there informed him of reasons to doubt the heritage of the money and specifically told him that while they could not prevent him and Black from taking money from Ochoa they might later seek its forfeiture. It may also be that they informed him of certain reasons to doubt the legitimact of the funds in anticipation that upon being so informed, certain steps would be taken to create the appearance that those reasons posited by the government were not existent.