George Zimmerman's Pet. for Writ of Prohibiton, Response Due Aug. 23
Mark O'Mara has posted the Petition for Writ of Prohibition and all Appendices filed in the 5th Circuit DCA on the GZlegalcase website. The index as to what is in the Appendices is here. The Petition for Writ of Prohibition (concerning the recusal of Judge Kenneth Lester) is here.
The Appendices have transcripts of the April 20, April 27, June 1 and June 29 hearings. They also have transcripts of Investigator Singleton and Serion's interview of Zimmerman the night of the shooting and Investigator Serino's telephone call with George on 3/25/12. There's also a transcript of witness 6 ("John")'s interview with FDLE on March 20, 2012. He is the witness who saw the struggle between Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin and says Trayvon was on top and Zimmerman was struggling to get up. [More...]
There's also a transcript of Witness 11's 911 call during which the shot can be heard.
The 5th Circuit DCA docket for the case is here. It is Case Number: 5D12-3198.
An order was entered today:
ORD-Writs Show Cause w/out Reply
The due date is August 23. It says the the case will not be stayed between now and August 23.
The order says "writs" rather than "writ." I think that means two writs issued, one to Judge Lester and one to the state. (Added: The court has since published the actual order, and only the State was required to respond, not Judge Lester. Judges are permitted to file a separate response, but not required to. The "writs" does not refer to more than one writ. However, the use of the phrase "writs to show case" does not seem to be a clerical error as some have assumed. In Florida, apparently, one responds to a writ to show cause with a "response." In other words, the response is the pleading by which one shows just cause not to grant the writ.
I assume the "w/o reply" means the defense cannot file a reply to whatever Judge Lester or the State files in response, but I'm not entirely clear on that. If someone has a different interpretation, please post it in comments. The Orlando Sentinel reporter says the state was directed to reply, but I'm not convinced the court wasn't also so directed.
From the Florida statute on writs of prohibition:
81.021 Prohibition; supersedeas.— If in its judgment a prima facie case is made, the court shall issue an order directed to the body presuming to exercise jurisdiction and to plaintiff to show cause why the writ of prohibition should not issue. The order is a supersedeas and shall be served on the body presuming to exercise jurisdiction and the parties at such time as the court directs and those served shall defend within the time set in the writ. In case of failure to make an answer, it may be enforced by contempt. (my emphasis)
|< Tuesday Morning Open Thread | Chelsea Clinton in September Issue of Vogue >|