Hello Again

I'm sure you're surprised to hear that I've been busy.

I've been keeping busy at the DOJ; I've mostly been working on memos, but I've also seen a few hearings and arguments. I've also been able to see a few movies and go to some family events. The family gathered at my parents' house for Memorial Day, where we had lunch and watched the twins' commercial. On Saturday, I went with the rest of the family to see the twins tap dance; after the (2 1/2 hour, 30 number) performance, we went out for dessert.

I got Friday off because of Reagan's death, so I spent the morning at my grandparents' with my mom and sister (and dog); the TV was on, so I was able to watch some of the eulogies. Later, I went to my sister's new apartment, and the two of us watched DVDs while waiting for her new bed to arrive.

Hearings and Arguments
I originally put these summaries together for the class that I'm taking in conjunction with the externship. Note that these are public hearings; as matters of public record, I am able to discuss the hearings. However, I can't really talk about what I'm working on because of confidentiality concerns.

Office of Administrative Hearings
The first case that I saw was a nursing case in which the licensee was accused of siphoning off medications. I heard some testimony from two witnesses: his wife and a supervisor at the hospital where he had worked. The wife testified about finding prescriptions made out in her name and a threat the licensee allegedly made to her children, while the supervisor discussed the discrepancies on the medication record. It was interesting to contrast the witnesses; the wife had difficulty recalling any details and understanding attorneys’ questions, while the supervisor appeared more responsive and could explain the records fairly thoroughly.

Another hearing concerned an acupuncturist who was alleged to have used his business as a front for prostitutes. The law at the time allowed unlicensed massage therapists to work under the supervision of acupuncturists and licensees involved in therapeutic professions, and one of the ‘massage therapists’ under his control was found to have engaged in prostitution. I observed the opening statements as well as the testimony of an officer involved in the investigation. In addition, as the licensee was Korean-American, a translator was involved; he was sworn in at the beginning and spoke softly into a microphone during the proceeding.

A third case, involving a brain surgeon, dealt with competence rather than the clearer abuses that had been alleged in the previous hearings. I heard the testimony of a general surgeon who had acted as an investigator. In addition to me and my fellow externs, several medical students came to observe the hearing.

The most recent case which I observed concerned a house painter who had failed to disclose a lien, which her husband had entered into, in her application for a license. She appeared pro se, with a younger son translating some of the more complex questions for her as English was not her first language. When it came time for her to make a final statement, she exclaimed that she was sorry and that she needed the work, but her son stepped in and indicated that earlier interviews were flawed because his older brother didn’t know enough about the situation to translate for their mother.

Civil Court
I was able to see several motions for writs in the civil court; two parties sought injunctions, one homeowner wanted to be joined in a zoning case, and two former licensees wanted writs of mandate so they could continue their practice. As the pace of these motions was accelerated, the judge was very matter-of-fact, cutting to the heart of the parties’ arguments.

Appellate Court
I was able to see three oral arguments before the Supreme Court of California, which met in Los Angeles on the first and second of June; the arguments were for People v. Hernandez (S117651), People v. Barker (S115438), and Kirkeby v. Superior Court (S 117640). The first case dealt with whether it was permissible for a trial court to not bifurcate a trial or give limiting instructions in a situation where gang members were on trial for robbery and, while one had mentioned the gang name in an attempt to intimidate, the background information on the gang wasn’t highly relevant to the substantive crime. In the second case, a sex offender was convicted for not registering, and the Court had to decide whether “forgetting” to register was a defense for the charge of “willfully” failing to register. The final case concerned property issues; the issue was whether a cause of action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance affected title and thereby allowed a notice of lis pendens to be recorded.