Last December Judge Hannah Dugan was convicted of one felony count of a obstructing federal agents. Her attorneys made it clear immediately that they planned to appeal the outcome. And because it was clear they planned to appeal, the judge overseeing the case never even scheduled a sentencing. Yesterday, the effort of the defense team to overturn the jury's verdict in the trial was denied.
U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman on April 6 issued a 39-page order, denying an appeal by Dugan's legal team and also rejecting the claim that she is immune from such prosecution.
"As I noted in denying the motion to dismiss, there was no basis for granting immunity simply because the indictment described conduct that could be considered 'part of a judge’s job,' Adelman wrote.
Most of the arguments made by the defense appear to be the same ones rejected by the jury.
Dugan's legal team filed a motion to overturn the verdict against her, arguing immigration agents were not allowed to make arrests in the courthouse and judges are immune from such prosecution, they wrote in a 46-page motion.
Federal prosecutors had labeled the effort by Dugan's team to overturn the jury's guilty verdict against her as "absurd" and urged Adelman to reject it. They wrote in a 45-page response that overturning a jury's verdict is reserved for extreme circumstances...
Adelman sided with the government, saying he saw no basis to order a new trial or dismiss the case. Such motions are rarely granted.
Adelman also wrote that Milwaukee judges were assuming ICE could make arrests.
"As the government notes, the operating assumption of those involved in creating a policy was that civil ICE arrests in public areas of the courthouse were lawful and the judiciary did not have the ability to stop them."
Despite the loss, Dugan's defense team is now planning to appeal to a higher court:
The closely watched case is headed for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, based on a statement from Dugan's legal team:
"We continue to maintain that Hannah Dugan acted lawfully and within her independent authority as a judge. The inconsistent jury verdicts demonstrate that the trial proceedings were flawed, and we plan to appeal."
Judge Dugan resigned from her job in January so this isn't about getting her job back. She's going to retain her pension, so it's not about that either. At this point, it seems she's just trying to win this at substantial cost to herself so she can claim she did nothing wrong.
The problem Dugan has is that the jury got this right. Dugan definitely attempted to obstruct federal agents by confronting them in the hallway and sending them to the Chief Judge's office (even though he was out that day).
She also clearly tried to conceal Eduardo Flores-Ruiz by sending him down a non-public stairway to the exit but she wasn't convicted on this count because the judge instructed the jury that, in order to be guilty of concealment, she needed to know Flores-Ruiz was the specific person the arrest team was there for that day. And since there was no proof that she did not know that, she was not convicted on that charge.
As for her claims that she was immune from arrest because this was all done as part of her job is not accurate, that's also not correct. The other judge who went with her testified she was very uncomfortable wearing her robe in the courthouse hallway, something she never did because judge's don't have the same control in the hallway, which is a public space, as they do in their courtrooms.
Judge Dugan tried to bully the arrest team and conceal their target. It would have worked if a) she hadn't overlooked one member of the arrest team who remained in the hallway and b) Flores-Ruiz and his attorney took the wrong door putting them back in the hallway rather than down the stairs to the exit. Again, the jury got this right.
Sentencing is now expected to take place in June but the judge still hasn't set a specific date for it. It's very unlikely Dugan will get any jail time, despite this being a felony conviction. The worst case is probably a few months of probation and a fine. We should find out in a couple months.
