A.G. Gancarski
At long last, a coherent defense strategy in the One Door for Education case — one that sees Rep. Corrine Brown and her chief of staff, Ronnie Simmons, as co-defendants — is taking shape.
Brown and Simmons both — as has been amply documented — have had difficulties retaining counsel in their case, which involves 24 counts of allegations that the One Door charity was a slush fund for Simmons and Brown, rather than a legitimate charitable endeavor, with counts relative to fraud, misrepresentation, failure to disclose earnings, and so on.
Demonstrated last week was, at long last, a commitment to a strategy to push the case forward, a commitment that never was officially in doubt in the courtroom of Judge James Klindt, but was doubted by some outside that space.
Evidence of the strategy and the continued harmony of the alleged co-conspirators was presented last week, via a joint filing signed by defense and prosecution attorneys that seeks to set meaningful deadlines in the case after they were “vacated” as the defendants “attempted to secure legal representation.”
With legal representation secured, and with the burden of discovery cited by Brown’s lawyer James Smith, the desire was to move the trial into the February trial term (which was what Suarez had told media he wanted, even while Smith suggested a springtime date would be more ideal).
If the February schedule is adopted by the court, the pre-trial action in the case would happen this fall.
All discovery and dispositive motions would be completed by the end of October, with motion hearings completed by early December 2016.
One of the reasons for the extended timeframe of this case cited in the filing: “the number of witnesses” set to testify, “many of those traveling from outside the Middle District of Florida.”
Conceptually, a February trial date will help facilitate such travel.
Despite the delayed trial (compared to early expectations the trial could take place during election season, a concern rendered moot in light of the electoral result Aug. 30), there are still factors to watch going forward.
One such: the divergence in strategies between Brown and Simmons’ defense lawyers.
Smith, on behalf of Brown, adamantly stated there would not be a plea deal after his client’s hearing last week.
Suarez, on behalf of Simmons, cheerfully opined that 95 percent of all cases are settled with plea deals.
There also, in terms of Smith’s defense of Brown, is another factor worth watching: “Volunteer” lawyer on Team Corrine, Natalie Jackson, recently suspended by the Florida Bar and facing money troubles, including a foreclosure auction later this month.
Speculation will, no doubt, swirl about the trial in the weeks ahead.
However, there is a chance Brown’s last few months in office, though pre-trial motions and such will be worth watching, may be surprisingly drama-free.
