Judge Hannah Dugan was convicted nearly two weeks ago of one felony count of obstruction. As I said at the time, it seemed pretty clear that the failure to get a conviction on the other misdemeanor count had everything to do with the judge's instructions to the jury.
As the jury deliberated, a question came out: Did Dugan need to know the identity of the man immigration agents were seeking to be found guilty of concealing him?
Adelman responded: Yes, she did. The jury voted to acquit on that count...
As jurors munched on pizza, another question came out. It was the same question as the first: Did Dugan need to know the suspect's identity to be guilty of count two?
But this time, the answer was different, more vague.
And the jury found Dugan guilty on count two.
In any case, what usually happens after a conviction is that the judge sets a date for sentencing. But so far, Judge Adelman hasn't done that in Dugan's case, which is unusual.
U.S. Judge Lynn Adelman has not set a sentencing date or ordered a pre-sentence investigation. A PSI is deep background check by a federal probation officer with details of the crime, defendant's criminal history and personal life and any victim impact to help the judge give a fair sentence.
It is unusual for a judge in the Eastern District of Wisconsin not to immediately order a PSI and set a sentencing date after a jury returns a guilty verdict.
After Adelman read the verdict on Dec. 18, Dugan's defense team said they would ask him to overturn the verdict.
The grounds for such a post-conviction motion have not been laid out, but the team has indicated it will argue that the answers Adelman gave to jury instructions were unclear and possibly improper. Judicial immunity is likely to come back as an argument, they said.
Is the fact that Adelman didn't set a sentencing date indicate he will overturn the jury's verdict? Too early to say, but it seems safe to say he is taking the motion seriously. A decision won't come until March.
So the appeal of the verdict will be decided in March and then, either way, the case will likely be appealed again to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. And if Judge Adelman hasn't felt the need to hold a sentencing before the first appeal he may not hold it before the next appeal either, which could take months.
Meanwhile, Republicans are working to impeach Judge Dugan as soon as next month.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, told the Wisconsin State Journal on Tuesday that lawmakers will seek to impeach Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan following her conviction on felony obstruction charges on Dec. 18, despite Dugan’s plan to appeal her conviction.
In addition, Vos said lawmakers plan to introduce a bill that would cut off pay to judges who are convicted of a crime.
“This is standard practice,” Vos said. “I don’t think it’s right that someone could say, ‘Well, we’re going to appeal for a year or two and keep getting paid.’”...
The state Constitution bars anyone convicted of a felony from serving as an elected official. A 50-year-old attorney general opinion also holds that a vacancy is created in an office when the person holding it is convicted of a felony.
There was never much chance that Judge Dugan was going to spend time in prison. As a former judge, she was going to get the bare minimum sentence, probably a fine and maybe some sort of probation. The real consequences for Dugan were always going to come in the form of losing her job and possibly her license to practice law.
Of course if her conviction is overturned she could eventually demand her job back. It's going to be a messy path either way, but for the moment it appears her impeachment could happen well before her sentencing.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Hot Air's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Hot Air VIP and use the promo code MERRY74 to receive 74% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member