In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Thread Scope
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - Vulture

SDNY COURTHOUSE, June 29 – Daniel Hernandez a/k/a Tekashi 6ix9ine was sentenced to 24 months of total imprisonment on December 18 in a proceeding live tweeted by Inner City Press before U.S. District Court Judge Paul A. Engelmayer.

   6ix9ine was ordered released by an Order that at the US' request Judge Engelmayer withheld until 4 pm on April 2, analyzed on Patreon here, 2-minute podcast here.

  On May 8 #6ix9ine released and World Star released GOOBA, here. His proposed $250,000 grant to a child hunger organization was rejected by No Kid Hungry. Then Kooking 4 Kids said it wanted it. Now there's... merch.

 As if in a parallel universe on June 29 Harv Ellison, convicted of carjacking #6ix9ine, filed this: "We write to supplement Mr. Ellison’s letter motion received by the Court on June 23 2020. We submit the attached letters (see Exhibit A) and articles (see Exhibit B) for Your Honor’s consideration. In addition, we have attached the names of twenty-one (21) individuals (see Exhibit C) who are prepared to co-sign a bond on Anthony’s behalf, a BOP COVID-19 Inmate Test report (see Exhibit D), BOP Progress Report (see Exhibit E), MCC Staff letters (see Exhibit F), Letter from Ho, Chi Ping Patrick (see Exhibit G), and Defendant’s motion with Exhibits (see Exhibit H). RISK OF FLIGHT Anthony’s has had prior brushes with the law. His contacts with the criminal justice system dates back to when he was eighteen (18) years old. In his many contacts with the system, he warranted or was issued a failure to appear.

In 2018, Anthony was charged with two (2) counts of Attempted Murder in New York State Supreme Court. He was released on $200,000 bond. Anthony made each and every one of his appearances. After the trial, he was found Not Guilty of both counts. His exposure there was greater than his exposure here. Moreover, while on Probation on other State charges, Mr. Ellison completed his probationary period without violations or convictions. Anthony is not a flight risk here. THREAT OF DANGER TO THE COMMUNITY The one blemish on Ellison’s BOP disciplinary record is an isolated incident between him and his co-defendant Kitano Jordan (Shotti). This was not a wanton random act of violence set upon a stranger. The incident does not belie Anthony’s conduct while in BOP’s custody. Certainly, it does not detract from the esteem in which he is held by BOP officials. In fact, he selected Head Ward/Orderly after the alteration. Moreover, in Anthony’s prior criminal history, he has never been charged with an act of violence. By and large, his criminal activities were essentially of a fraudulent nature. Likewise, the evidence adduced at trial did not speak of Anthony engaging in random acts of violence. To the contrary, the evidence showed his efforts and attempts to thwart the violence that was carried out by Daniel Hernandez (Tekashi 69), Kifano Jordan (Shotti) and others. was Anthony referenced Michael Spinelli in his moving papers. We note that Mr. Spinelli charged with Murder and other violent crimes. In addition, he had numerous BOP disciplinary infractions. was A plethora of individuals have submitted letters that speaks to Anthony’s good nature and peacefulness in the community.

 PROPOSED BAIL CONDITIONS $500,000.00 personal recognizance bond Secured by twenty-one (21) financially responsible individuals Home confinement with GPS monitoring with leave to afford medical appointments, (specifically to his dentist to have his braces removed) Visits with his attorney Surrender of passport Travel restricted to the Southern & Eastern Districts of New York No contact/communication with any gang members and/or co-defendants Given Anthony’s health issues, exposure to COVID-19 in BOP facilities, puts his life in great danger. Please know that Mr. Ellison has informed us that as of today’s date his unit is under quarantine and lockdown due to another confirmed positive case of COVlD-19 in his Unit 1 IN. MCC is clearly struggling to gain control over the transmission of this virus even after the imposed lockdown."

   Earlier in June Kintea McKenzie a/k/a Kooda B, who pled guilty then while on COVID-19 related release was filmed celebrating without social distance, on June 3 had his assigned Criminal Justice Act lawyer Lisa Scolari withdraw. Inner City Press covered and live tweeted the proceeding, as it will this one:

"The Court adjourns Mr. McKenzie's sentencing until September 25, 2020 at 10:00 a.m., in recognition of defense counsel's request that sentencing not be held at a time when traveling to court may present heightened health risks to counsel. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/18/2020)."

  On June 8, Judge Engelmayer issued these two orders: "ORDER as to Kintea McKenzie: At a conference held on June 3, 2020, the Court permitted Lisa Scolari, Esq., to withdraw as court-appointed counsel for defendant Kintea McKenzie, based on her representation to the Court that on or about May 15, 2020, she had become aware of circumstances that presented a conflict precluding her continued representation of Mr. McKenzie. The Court appointed Richard Rosenberg, Esq., as successor counsel. To assure itself that the nature of Ms. Scolari's conflict does not present a basis to invalidate Mr. McKenzie's guilty plea, entered in June 2019, the Court directed Ms. Scolari to file, for the Court's ex parte and in camera review, a letter detailing the circumstances under which Ms. Scolari recently had become aware of the circumstances giving rise to a conflict. The Court has reviewed Ms. Scolari's letter to that effect, dated June 5, 2020, which the Court has directed Ms. Scolari to file under seal. The Court is satisfied that no conflict existed with respect to Ms. Scolari's representation of Mr. McKenzie until mid-May 2020, and that the emergence of this conflict does not, in any way, cast doubt on the viability of Mr. McKenzie's guilty plea or any other aspect of Ms. Scolari's representation of Mr. McKenzie. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/8/2020) (ap)"

 Then, minutes later: "ORDER as to Kintea McKenzie: On June 5, 2020, the Court received a request, via email, from Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press, seeking to unseal filings concerning a conflict of interest raised by Kintea McKenzie's now-former counsel, Lisa Scolari, Esq. Later that day, the Court received an ex parte letter, via email, from Ms. Scolari, explaining the nature of the conflict of which she recently had become aware. The Court has determined that Ms. Scolari's ex parte communications relate to highly confidential facts about a separate attorney-client representation, and thus are properly not publicly filed. Accordingly, the Court denies Mr. Lee's request. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/8/2020) (ap)."

  While the order is appreciated, not knowing more about these "highly confidential facts," what happened to the presumption of public access to filings in criminal cases? To the idea of redacting rather than withholding in full? The logic seems circular: it is simply "highly confidential." Why?  Watch this site.

Judge Engelmayer previous said, "An issue arose in March, letter of April 6."

Judge Engelmayer: I expect to grant your request since you say unwaivable conflict. However, this relates to some other legal representation of yours. Which predates this one. At some point some person may claim you've worked under a conflict. I want to know more.

Judge Engelmayer does not order the filing of a public letter, but one "ex parte" with him, in camera so the public will never see.

[Inner City Press wonders: How does the presumptive public nature of Federal criminal cases apply to this?]

Scolari: I will take that under consideration.

Judge Engelmayer: If it is the case that the information you would share would case Mr. McKenzie in a bad light, I could disregard it. When will you send the letter? End of the day Friday. It will be emailed - "We can take care of submitting it under seal."

 Judge Engelmayer: I need to understand why this did not undermine your prior advice to Mr. McKenzie during the plea proceeding. Any order I issue will not disclose any confidential material contained in your letter.

Next CJA lawyer is Mr. Rosenberg.

Judge Engelmayer: You have no connection with Nine Trey?

A: I do not.

Judge Engelmayer: Do you agree, AUSA Longyear?

AUSA: I do.

Judge: Are you ok with this Mr. McKenzie?

A: Yes.

  But what is the conflict that existed at the time of his guilty plea? Watch this site.

We'll have more on this - more including order on Patreon here.

 The case is US v. Jones, 18-cr-834 (Engelmayer). More on Patreon here.

***

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 2006-2019 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for