Ex K&L
Gates Lawyer Willie Dennis For Oct Trial
May Get Subpoenas But Chided on Rules
By Matthew Russell
Lee, Patreon
BBC
- Guardian
UK - Honduras
- ESPN
SDNY COURTROOM,
Sept 16 – In the U.S. District
Court for the Southern
District of New York on
November 19, 2021 a detention
proceeding was held by
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang
on a defending brought in from
the Dominican Republic the
night before.
Willie E. Dennis,
formerly a lawyer at K&L
Gates, was charged with cyber
stalking. At first the US
Attorney's Office was OK with
his release, but them things
switched. Inner City Press
live tweeted it here:
Willie E. Davis
is currently in FBI custody in
290 Broadway. He has been
assigned a Federal Defender,
who has spoken 3 or 4 times
today with Dennis by phone.
Judge Wang: Why
is this not in person? AUSA:
He arrived from outside the
US, we don't know his vax
status.
US says:
"DENNIS, a U.S. citizen, was
arrested this week in the
Dominican Republic... He
engaged in a campaign of
harassment, intimidation, and
threats against multiple
individuals, including other
partners, who worked at the
[K&L Gate Law] Firm."
Dennis owns a
multi-family building, and
property in the Dominican
Republic, but he has debts. He
is being given a
publicly-funded Federal
Defender.
AUSA: He was
arrested in the Dominican
Republic on Nov 16 and
arrested in the US yesterday.
Judge Wang: You are charged
with four counts of
cyber-stalking.
Judge Wang took a
break and returned, to rule:
"I am accepting recommendation
he be detained until fitted
with a bracelet or co-signers
can sign the bond."
Jump cut to
August 15, 2022 when the case,
reassigned to Judge Jed S.
Rakoff, had on short notice a
phone conference that pointed
to an in-person one: "Minute
Entry for proceedings held
before Judge Jed S. Rakoff:
Telephone Conference as to
Willie Dennis held on
8/15/2022. Present were the
defendant and his consulting
counsel, Anthony Cecutti and
Kastine Thiele, AUSA Rushmi
Bhaskaran for the government
and a court reporter. The
Court sets a conference in
courtroom 14B to consider the
defendant's application to
relieve consulting appointed
counsel and substitute in new
consulting assigned counsel."
But not so
simply: Dennis has to pay:
"ORDER as to Willie Dennis:
The Court had originally
scheduled an in-court
conference for August 17,
2022, to consider various
issues raised by pro se
defendant Willie Dennis. Mr.
Dennis expressly confirmed
that he would attend the
conference in person. However,
on August 15, 2022, Mr. Dennis
requested that, for personal
reasons, the conference be
moved to August 18, 2022 and
that he be permitted to
participate remotely. The
Court agreed to his request
and gave Mr. Dennis the option
of appearing telephonically at
the Court's expense or
appearing by videoconference
at his own expense. He elected
the latter. Accordingly, the
Finance Department of the
United States District Court
for the Southern District of
New York shall invoice
defendant pro se for the cost
of this videoconferencing. All
other conference participants
will attend in person at
Courtroom 14-B, 500 Pearl St.,
New York, NY."
Inner City Press
went and live tweeted it here:
OK- K&L Gates
lawyer Willie Dennis charged
with stalking is appearing
before Judge Jed S. Rakoff by
Zoom. He moves his laptop to
show his mother lying down
next to him.
[For most of the
Zoom, the camera was on
Dennis' face, at an angle. But
at the beginning and end he
turned the camera down, to
show his sick mother on a bed
- or perhaps so that she could
see the courtroom participants
and gallery?
Dennis is reading
a statement by shaky Zoom,
attacking Judge Rakoff. "I
have been unemployed two
years." Trial in 6 weeks?
Dennis: I
face a judge who has
reprimanded me...I want to
show 1000s of K&L Gates
emails before the jury. Judge:
What do you seek?
Dennis: A sidebar
with my CJA, to see if they
are acceptable. Judge: No.
Dennis:
Appointment accepted! Mr
Dennis would like to subpoena
the management community of
K&L. Gates. Judge: Let's
move trial to Oct 11. Dennis:
How about earlier?
Dennis: My
communications are not being
received. I have a memo.
Judge: You can file that.
Convene a joint phone call.
Notes: Judge
Rakoff will be issuing a
written order granting Dennis
his phone, over the
Government's objection.
Judge Rakoff also
dismissed the AUSA's request
to test Dennis' competence, or
have the now-fired stand-by
lawyers testify about Dennis.
The AUSA said these counsel
had already provided the
Government will some
information. One expected
Dennis to object by Zoom, but
he did not. Yet.
Then this:
"MEMORANDUM ORDER as to Willie
Dennis. At the conference
before this Court on August
18, 2022, the Court granted
the pro se motion of defendant
Willie Dennis for the return
of his phone. The Court
further indicated that it
would issue a Memorandum
setting forth the reasons for
that ruling by no later than
noon on August 22, 2022,
following which the Government
could seek modification or
reconsideration by convening a
joint telephone conference
with defendant and the Court
by no later than 5:00 PM on
August 22, 2022. Here (a few
days early) is that
Memorandum. Mr. Dennis is
accused of cyberstalking, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §
2261A(2)(B) and 2. On November
16, 2021, the Government,
pursuant to a lawfully
executed search warrant,
seized Mr. Dennis's phone. The
Government extracted the
contents of Mr. Dennis's phone
on December 20, 2021, creating
a "snapshot" of material that
law enforcement agents could
review. Letter from the United
States of America to Judge
Lorna G. Schofield, Dct. No.
62 (July 19, 2022), at 1.
Although more than nine months
have passed since the seizure,
the Government represents that
it has not completed its
review of the phone's
contents. While this seems a
bit plodding, the Government
further represents that it
intends to use Mr. Dennis's
phone as evidence during trial
(which is now firmly scheduled
to commence on October 11,
2022). The Court construes Mr.
Dennis's pro se motion as
having been made pursuant to
Rule 41(g) of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure.
In order to prevail on a Rule
41(g) motion, the moving party
must show that "(1) he is
entitled to lawful possession
of the seized property; (2)
the property is not
contraband; and (3) either the
seizure was illegal or the
government's need for the
property as evidence has
ended." United States v.
Pinto-Thomaz, 352 F. Supp. 3d
287, 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2018). The
Government does not dispute
that Mr. Dennis is entitled to
"rightful ownership [of] or
title" to the phone."
Then docketed on
September 12, this: "ORDER as
to Willie Dennis. This order
concerns subpoenas that
defendant pro se Willie Dennis
seeks to serve on third-party
witnesses. A defendant must
seek leave of Court before
attempting to serve a subpoena
on a third-party witness.
("[A] defendant must seek
leave of Court before issuing
a subpoena for documents
returnable before trial.");
see also United States v.
Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 695
(1974) (providing that a
third-party subpoena must seek
information that is (1)
relevant, (2) admissible, and
(3) specific); United States
v. Tucker, 249 F.R.D. 58, 66,
(S.D.N.Y. 2008) (forbidding
third-party subpoenas that are
"unreasonable or oppressive").
However, on August 2, 2022,
Judge Schofield (to whom this
case was previously assigned)
ordered that Mr. Dennis "is
entitled to have subpoenas for
witnesses and documents
necessary to his defense
served without prior approval
by the Court," ECF No. 67
(emphasis added). While it is
unclear whether that order
merely referenced the fact
that, once the content of a
subpoena had been approved by
the Court, no further order
was required for service to be
effected, in any event it
could not have meant that Mr.
Dennis was being given carte
blanche by Judge Schofield to
propound any subpoenas he
wished, for in the following
weeks, Judge Schofield began
to review Mr. Dennis's
subpoena requests, three of
which she then granted on
August 11, 2022. ECF No. 73.
In any event, after this case
was reassigned to the
undersigned, at a pretrial
conference held on August 18,
2022, this Court told Mr.
Dennis that he must submit any
subpoenas to the Court for
approval. Conference of Aug.
18, 2022, Tr. 19:21-21:9.
Subsequently, the Court
reviewed, approved, and
personally signed eight of Mr.
Dennis's subpoenas. However,
after Mr. Dennis then
submitted a subpoena that was
improper on its face, on
August 30, 2022, the Court
issued an email order
requiring Mr. Dennis to
substantiate any further
subpoenas with an explanation
of why the information sought
would be at least facially
relevant, legally permissible,
and not unduly burdensome to
produce. On September 6, 2022,
the Court approved four
additional subpoenas requested
by Mr. Dennis, even though
their relevance appeared dim.
Since the number of subpoenas
approved for service had by
then become very large, and
their burdens disproportionate
to their use, the Court, on
September 6, 2022, further
informed Mr. Dennis that any
additional subpoenas must be
submitted to the Court by 5:00
PM on Friday, September 9,
2022. That deadline has now
passed. So, while the Court
expects that it will, upon
review, approve Mr. Dennis's
four additional subpoena
requests, now outstanding, no
additional subpoena requests
by Mr. Dennis shall be
hereafter approved. (Signed by
Judge Jed S. Rakoff on
9/9/2022)."
And it has
continued: "ORDER as to Willie
Dennis. The Court informed
defendant pro se Willie
Dennis, on the record and in
no uncertain terms, that under
the Court's longstanding
Individual Rules of Practice,
any application to the Court
cannot be made in the form of
unsolicited emails, letters,
or the like, and, instead,
must be raised by telephone
calls to the Court made
jointly by all parties.
Conference of Aug. 15, 2022,
Tr. 2:21-3:19; see also I.R.
1-2. Notwithstanding this
instruction, Mr. Dennis
recently submitted, via the
pro se Clerk for the U.S.
District Court of the Southern
District of New York, numerous
applications set forth in two
letters dated, respectively,
September 9, 2022 and
September 11, 2022, both of
which were forwarded to the
Court on September 15, 2 022.
In accordance with the Court's
Individual Rules of Practice
Nos. 1 and 2, these letters
are considered a nullity and
without legal or other effect.
They will be totally
disregarded If Mr. Dennis
wishes to make any
application, he must convene a
joint telephone conference,
with himself, his standby
counsel, Government counsel,
and the Court, in accordance
with the Court's Individual
Rules of Practice. In order to
allow for such conference to
be recorded by a court
reporter, he, his standby
counsel, and the Government
must agree in advance on a
date and time at which to call
the Court, so that the Court
can arrange for a court
reporter to record the call.
For this purpose only, Mr.
Dennis and Government counsel
should call the Court's law
clerk to inform the Court of
the proposed time for the
joint call. (Signed by Judge
Jed S. Rakoff on 9/16/22)."
This case is US
v. Dennis, 20-cr-623 (Rakoff)
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|