Casey starts probation

Casey reported Wednesday evening to Florida authorities to begin serving a one-year probation on an unrelated check fraud conviction, officials said.
She came in, but the Florida Department of Corrections offered no more details including where she is. A news conference was scheduled for this morning.

Corrections spokeswoman Gretl Plessinger had earlier said the agency will not disclose where Anthony will report to probation, as a safety precaution.
A Florida appeals court on Tuesday denied a request that would have stopped her from being forced to start the probation by the end of the week.

Casey must get off her ass and find a job!

The Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled that Casey must serve probation for check fraud.
She has until noon Friday to report to a probation office in the state.  According to Baez, she's already in Florida.  Where? My guess? Pinellas County!
The court ruled "that sentencing is not a game and Casey Anthony cannot take advantage of a clerical error. In a two-page ruling, it says she and her lawyers knew her probation was to start after her release. The court ruled she never served probation, so it’s not double jeopardy.

The defense team however has worked out a deal where she will report for probation secretly. She will not have to walk into a place where everybody will know her. Her address will not be publicized. So we likely will not know where she is living right now or where will be living in the future while she does serve this probation.
The court decided that a judge’s oral pronouncements take precedence over written orders.

Casey's back...Dun Dun DUNNNNNNN!!!

While Casey waits to find out if she will have to report back to Orange County for probation, Baez confirmed on national television that she is back in Florida.
Baez told Fox News talk show Geraldo Rivera in an interview taped Sunday night that Casey is back in Florida and ready to report.
“She is back in Florida. We brought her back in the event the appellate court rules sometime this week. And we're going to follow the letter of the law,” he said.
But he is still hoping she won't have to report to probation and parole.He thinks Judge Perry's ruling is unfair as she supposedly already went through probation while waiting for her trial to begin.
Casey has been ordered to report to a probation office by Friday for her check fraud conviction, but her attorneys are fighting to get that order stopped.

Baez under investigation

It appears Jose Baez is in trouble with the Florida Bar Association for his handling of the Casey Anthony bad-check case. 
When Perry ordered Casey to Florida to serve her 1-year probation sentence on bad-check charges, as we all know by now, Baez and his team stated she had already served her sentence while in jail during her murder trial.  The problem with that says Orange County is that the court was never notified and they wanted her to serve the sentence AFTER the murder trial.
When Judge Belvin Perry issued an order mandating Anthony return from wherever to start her probation he also cited her attorney’s: “The failure to abide by that order and the failure to notify the court of a known scrivener’s error in the order may be a violation of an attorney’s duty of candor.”
“No attorney should conduct himself or herself in a way that impedes an order of the court,” Perry said. “Our system of justice should never be in the position of rewarding someone who willfully hides the ball.”
An unidentified person or person filed a complaint on Baez handling of the Anthony case and the Florida bar is now conducting an ‘open’ investigation.  The State of Florida has given Casey until next week August 26 to show up to serve the probation sentence.

Casey's Defense Appeals! Shocked? No Way!

Casey's defense team filed an emergency petition today with an appeals court, asking the judges to vacate Judge Perry’s recent order that will require her to report to probation by next week.
Perry ruled last week that Anthony has until Aug. 26 to turn herself in to the Florida Department of Corrections, which will monitor her for one year while she serves probation.
Defense attorneys Lisabeth Fryer and Cheney Mason in their emergency filing called that an “illegal sentence.”

There was confusion last month, when Casey was acquitted on the murder charge and released from jail, about whether she would have to serve the probation.
DOC allowed Casey to serve the probation while in jail, but that was not Strickland intended. Obviously, that wouldn't make sense right? Well, DOC thought it did at the time. Well you know what I think of them: Idiots!
The defense team argues Casey shouldn’t have to serve probation twice.
In their emergency petition, the defense team said Perry’s order “ignores the fact that the Defendant did, in fact, actually serve her term of probation and was subject to the threat of violation of probation if she, for instances, wrote a letter of apology to the victim had a physical altercation with a correctional officer or another inmate, or was in the possession of contraband.”
The defense said Casey was subject to DOC  supervision “and the anxiety associated with a probationary period.”  Oh poor baby! Cry me a river!!  She's an idiot too!

Casey must be back in Orlando by Aug. 26!

Casey Anthony WILL SERVE  probation for one year for her check-fraud convictions, and has to report to the Department of Corrections no later than Aug. 26,  Judge Belvin Perry ruled today.Casey's address can remain confidential because of safety concerns.

Perry heard arguments last week from Anthony's defense team, who said she already served probation and shouldn't have to serve it again.
In his order, Perry said it is clear Anthony's probation was to start once she was released from jail. He said Strickland had the ability to correct what amounted to a clerical error.
Perry said there was no double jeopardy issue because Casey couldn't comply with the standard 13 conditions of probation while she was in jail.
"To permit the Defendant, whose counsel was well aware that the probation was to begin upon the Defendant's release from jail, to avoid serving probation now, would take a lawfully imposed sentence and make it a mockery of justice," he wrote. "This would allow a defendant to take advantage of a scrivener's error and be rewarded. This is not the message the courts want to send to the public or defendants."

During last week's hearing, he asked the defense if they knew about the probation being served in jail. Defense attorney Lisabeth Fryer admitted that they did, but said it wasn't the defense's burden to notify the court about it.
Perry took up that issue in his order as well, stating that attorneys have "a duty of candor."
"While ignorance of the contents of a court order is one thing, the failure to abide by that order and the failure to notify the court of a known scrivener's error in the order may be a violation of an attorney's duty of candor," Perry wrote. "To additionally seek to use a scrivener's error to achieve an end that was against the court's intent, especially where both parties had argued the issue of when probation should commence, strikes at the very foundation of our justice system."
Perry continued, "No attorney should conduct himself or herself in a way that impedes an order of the court.…Our system of justice should never be in the position of rewarding someone who willfully hides the ball."
Perry included a portion of the Florida Bar's rules of professional conduct in his order.
"It is very clear that the Defendant and her attorney knew she was to start her probation upon release from the Orange County Jail. Despite this fact, they took advantage of a scrivener's error which start the probation while she was being held in the jail pending trial. The defense should not be able to claim that they are now harmed by having the Defendant serve probation at this time."

Perry noted in his order that Anthony's safety is a concern, and referenced an Orlando Sentinel article about a poll that referred to Anthony as America's most-hated person.
"This Court is very mindful that it is a high probability that there are many that would like to see physical harm visited upon the Defendant."
Perry ordered Anthony to report to the Department of Corrections no later than 12 p.m. Aug. 26, but she could report earlier. Her probation will begin the day she reports.

Wow! I wonder if Baez or anyone else from the defense were prepared for this ruling! I wonder if anybody out there needs a nanny or sitter!

Seriously though, who is going to hire her. Maybe a strip bar. That's probably the only thing she will be able to do. Doubtful she will find any Walmart to hire her.

Hearing on Casey's possible probation

When my husband told me last night to write the blog already stating that Casey will not be serving probation, I said no. I have trust in Judge Perry.

Baez started the hearing with a witness talking to the lawyers "telefonically". Yes, that's what I wrote and that's what he said.  Of course, everyone got excited thinking it may be Casey Anthony. Well, no we are disappointed once again. It's Susan Finnegan. Casey's Parole Supervisor. She testified that probation officer Natalie Lewis visited Casey in jail.  Baez made the point through this testimony that Casey was supervised and did probation in jail awaiting trial.  Finnegan said if Perry puts Casey on probation she'll be treated just like any other person.  Baez asked Finnegan if they'd have to take extra security measures. She said it's possible.  And said supervising Casey would be a "unique challenge" She also said Casey's probation was completed 1-24-11. They sent her a letter acknowledging that.

Frank George speaks for the State.  He asked Finnegan what's the purpose of probation. She said to protect community.  Frank George said probation isn't designed to look over people who are already in custody. Baez objects.  George questioned usefulness of probation while someone is still in jail. * I agree* Finnegan explained how often a probation officer would see a person, depending on the level they're on.
Baez done questioning, now Perry had questions for Finnegan. He asked if she ever asked Judge Strickland on his thoughts on issue of tolling.  She responded no. Perry now references case law for attorneys that deal with probation tolling issue.
 Lisabeth Fryer now up for defense. * Ughhh her voice annoys me!* Fryer  argued Casey has actually served probation and order came from previously "disqualified judge." She also argues Strickland was recused. It lacks jurisdiction.   She then reviewed previous cases. Fryer says Strickland's move was a "vindictive" move against Casey. 
Perry has questions for Fryer. He asked if she reviewed the sentencing transcript. She says no, but that she saw the video. Perry has copies of transcript. Hands to Fryer.  Perry looks over transcript, notes it was long before Strickland was recused from the murder case.  Perry confirms Strickland's oral announcement was that she was to serve probation upon release from jail.  Perry asked Fryer what obligation does an attorney have to report probation started if it was in conflict with Strickland's order.
JP: "I will be the first to admit this is not a clear cut issue." Perry asked Fryer for her take on what a judge can do to correct the error.  He asked if the defense knew that Casey began serving probation while in jail even though the Judge determined it should be after her release from jail. She said yes and began stuttering an explanation. He attributes the problem to "scrivener's error"  She says that Strickland is biased. He agrees with her, but says that Strickland said whatever he said before all of these issues came about.  She got very nervous. 
* I still can't believe that thid defense team was able to get Casey free! Again I will say to all who read even those who don't agree with me: THE JURY WAS A BUNCH OF IDIOTS!!! *
Perry again asks if Casey's attorneys had an obligation to notify the court the probation didn't conform with Strickland's oral order.  Perry again said Casey was in jail awaiting trial, not serving a sentence.  Perry said Casey's strongest argument is whether Strickland had jurisdiction to clarify "scrivener's error."  Liz Fryer says this is done. It's over. She (Casey) has served probation. She shouldn't have to do it again.  They then went back and forth on the definition of a "sentence".  Judge Perry says Casey was "erroneously " placed on probation.  Perry says "it is a legal maze."
George then speaks again to the Judge.   He said the State believes that it doesn't make sense for probation to be served while in Jail.  "It defeats the purpose." Said that it was probation in "name only."  George said he thinks there is grounds for Strickland's corrected order to stand.  He said there is no jeopardy issue.  "Strickland didn't change sentence or add. He simply corrected a scrivener's error."  Perry asked  George when did the prosecutors learned written and oral announcements were different, and Casey's probation was in jail.  He said he learned when Strickland filed the latest order clarifying issue.  He never received paperwork saying Casey started or ended probation in jail.
Lisabeth Fryer back up. She argued Casey shouldn't be given what they call second sentence.
Judge Perry says he is well aware of the threats against Casey.  He said he wants to talk with DOC to see what they can do.  Perry says he doesn't know if Administrative probation is the way to go. JP: “If anything could go wrong, it went wrong here.” Judge Perry says if you read court transcripts- it was clear.  Fryer says there was a formal termination of probation from Dept of Corrections.
 Judge Perry said he knows of no other case with circumstances like this.  He called this case "a mess."  We're ending w a sidebar. Feels like old days. Fryer says it's regarding a completely different matter.  No decision today.  Judge Perry gives no indication when he'll rule.