Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Arizona Attorney Exonerated After Arrest

In our sixth story in our investigative series, ‘Disney grandson at forefront of reform', we reported how one of the attorneys on the case was arrested by the judge.

This week an appeals court has exonerated him.

The Arrest
In November 2010, Joel Sannes found himself at the center of a probate court controversy.

A judge ordered Sannes arrested for contempt of court because Sannes refused to answer a judge's questions.

Sannes claimed that information fell under the attorney-client privilege.

So, a sheriff's deputy handcuffed Sannes and took him to a holding cell.

“I've never been subject to any proceeding like this before. It was highly unusual,” Sannes said.

Exonerated
Judge Peter Swann agreed. In his appeals order, Swann wrote that “the trial court’s actions constituted a clear abuse of discretion…”

This cleared Sannes of all contempt charges and sanctions or fines against him.

The order does not address any actions against the trial judge who ordered the arrest.

Critics worry it may happen again.

The following is a short synopsis and the conclusion taken from Judge Peter Swann’s opinion:

In this guardianship proceeding, an expert witness complained to the court about the burden posed by a subpoena for records. Within days, the court sua sponte set a show-cause hearing concerning possible sanctions. Before the hearing, the court announced its view that the subpoena represented an abuse of the discovery process and had been served as a means of harassing the witness. At the show-cause hearing, the court issued an order of confinement that resulted in a lawyer being handcuffed in open court when he declined to answer questions under oath that would have invaded the attorney-client privilege pursuant to a common interest agreement. Several attorneys subject to the ensuing sanctions order now seek special action relief. We conclude that the trial court’s actions constituted a clear abuse of discretion, and we therefore accept jurisdiction and grant relief.

CONCLUSION
To be sure, there are times when an attorney may behave in a contumacious manner, flout a court order without cause or so denigrate the integrity of the court that immediate and drastic sanctions, including contempt, may be required. But when, as here, attorneys respectfully assert a legal position with which the court disagrees, the notion that they can properly be handcuffed in the courtroom undercuts the rules of procedure and ethos of the courts of this state. No attorney should fear that the assertion of privilege will result in the deprivation of his or her liberty until the full measure of due process has been afforded. The conduct of the court in this case represented a clear abuse of discretion,and we therefore grant relief and vacate the contempt finding against Sannes and all sanctions entered against the Attorneys.

Source:
Attorney at Probate Court Exonerated After Arrest

See Also:
Read the Ruling in its Entirety

Judge in Disney Case Orders Arrest of Lawyer at a Hearing

AZ Judge Donahoe Resigns After Getting Caught in Fib

10 comments:

  1. Abuse of discretion? So what else is new?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Congratulations on this great win!

    And Donahue's off the bench now, how good is that?!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What good is attorney-client privilege when a judge decides he's free to invade it?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I bet Joel Sannes and all the lawyers in AZ for that matter are smiling!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Applause to the appellate court for not rubberstamping the decision and backing a fellow judge.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is wonderful news and gives us all a glimmer of hope that there is hope!

    ReplyDelete
  7. It was an outrage to watch the attorney being cuffed and arrested, this really bothered me.

    You Bet this was an abuse of discretion !

    It took real grit and courage
    for Attorney Sannes Not to Stand
    Down to the courts abuse of discretion.

    Another good outcome, one by one injustice is being defeated.

    Very, Very proud of Attorney Sannes !

    ReplyDelete
  8. In Cook County Probate Court (recently) Judge Jane Louise Stuart kicked out all of my supporters, witnesses (via supbeona) and even an attorney, had me hand-cuffed to a metal chair, and (according to her) ordered the Sherriffs to threaten me with time in Cook County Jail without bond unless I gave up the account number to my Health Account. I was denied an attorney (and of course, there was no notice or hearing or judgement or***). I would have gone to jail had it not been that the sheriff then threatened to have my companion healing dog, Shaggy, picked up and put in a kill shelter. The Judge then crossed state lines and had my assets frozen. I am a breast cancer survivor with a diagnosis of situational PTSD. I have been without any preventative treatments, therapy for about four months: I just lost my health insurance. On the 8th of July 2011, Judge Stuart then admitted she ordered me chained to the chair, and bragged about all she 'accomplished'. Yep, this goes on all the time, but in Cook County, it's business as usual. I petitioned for pauper status, and was denied: I had to drop my appeal because I couldn't afford the court transcript. I'm happy to hear that there are some honest Appelalte judges in Arizona.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Every once in a while, justice is served.

    ReplyDelete