When prominent South
Florida criminal defense attorney Joel Hirschhorn announced at a 1989 meeting
of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers that he would no
longer represent accused drug traffickers, he was seen as a traitor by
his colleagues. Now, he's considered a visionary.
Hirschhorn, a partner
at Hirschhorn & Bieber in Coral Gables, Fla., who made much of his
living representing Medellin drug cartel figures in the 1980s, says he
saw the writing on the wall when the government started seizing lawyers'
fees as forfeiture funds. But he never dreamed federal prosecutors would
start putting defense lawyers into prison for accepting fees to represent
those accused of drug dealing and white-collar crimes.
To the dismay of
the defense bar, that's become a fairly common occurrence across the country,
particularly in Miami.
In the latest case,
criminal defense attorney Neil Taylor is now on trial in U.S. District
Court in Miami on charges of money laundering, conspiracy to obstruct justice
and filing false tax returns in connection with accepting legal fees to
represent an accused drug dealer. Taylor is charged with taking more than
$1 million in illicit fees from accused drug lords Willie Falcon and Sal
Magluta, in violation of a restraining order that froze the two men's assets,
then hiding the source of the money on his tax forms.
When accepting payments
of more than $10,000, all businesses, including law firms, are required
to file Internal Revenue Service forms detailing names and full identification
of those paying. Taylor, say prosecutors, conspired with the accused drug
traffickers to make up a phony name and driver license for Wilfredo Alvarez,
who was a courier for Falcon and Magluta, and who allegedly paid Taylor's
fee. Taylor's attorney, Robert Josefsberg, a partner at Podhurst Orseck
Josefsberg in Miami, denies the charges.
Prosecutors have
accused Falcon and Magluta in court of operating a $2 billion drug trafficking
business. They allegedly spent $25 million on attorneys' fees through the
1990s. They were acquitted in 1996, but a jury foreman was later charged
with taking a bribe in that trial. Falcon and Magluta, who remain behind
bars, are facing a new federal indictment alleging conspiracy to intimidate
and bribe witnesses.
Taylor's trial, which
began last week, is at its midpoint, with the government expected to wrap
up its case by today. He is the fourth lawyer -- out of nearly 40 who represented
Falcon and Magluta -- to be prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's office in
Miami. The other three -- Don Ferguson, Leonard Mark Dachs and Richard
Martinez -- all were convicted.
"This has had a chilling
effect on criminal defense lawyers," says Richard Sharpstein, another criminal
defense attorney who used to specialize in drug cases. "I and most lawyers
will not go near cases where the fees are questionable, 'cause they're
absolutely not worth it."
WEAPON IN THE
DRUG WAR
The U.S. Department
of Justice started clamping down on lawyers who represent alleged drug
dealers in the early 1980s by seizing their fees as forfeiture funds. The
crackdown was prompted by fear among tough-on-drugs politicians and law
enforcement officials that the government was losing the war on illegal
narcotics because cocaine and marijuana kingpins were hiring high-priced
lawyers and winning acquittals.
In the mid-1980s,
Congress passed tough money laundering laws, the Sentencing Reform Act
of 1984 and the Money Laundering Act of 1986, which gave federal prosecutors
powerful new weapons in the narcotics war. It enabled them to put anyone
who took money originating from drug trafficking or other illegal activities
in prison.
But some defense
attorneys say these statutes were never intended to be used against attorneys
representing defendants in these cases. They point to an amendment, passed
by Congress in 1994 after heavy lobbying by criminal defense lawyers, that
excludes funds used "for the right to representation as guaranteed by the
Sixth Amendment" from consideration in money laundering cases.
Barry Sabin, the
First Assistant U.S. Attorney in Miami, declined to comment for this article,
saying it would be inappropriate while the Taylor case is under way. But
in the past, federal prosecutors have denied they are targeting defense
lawyers in an effort to prevent drug dealers and white-collar criminals
from hiring top legal talent. They have insisted that they simply go after
anyone who takes "dirty money," including real estate developers, bankers
and other business operators.
Defense lawyers are
dubious. Miami lawyer Neal Sonnett, who represented Don Ferguson, says
a senior Justice Department official recently told him: "We hope to make
it impossible for any drug dealer to hire a lawyer." Sonnett says he was
"flabbergasted."
Indeed, Mark Rubino,
the Assistant U.S. Attorney prosecuting Taylor, sent this stark message
to drug dealers in his opening statement last week: "If you do not have
the money to hire a lawyer, the court will hire a lawyer for you. You can't
use your dirty money to hire a lawyer."
ENDANGERED SPECIES
If scaring lawyers
out of representing criminal defendants was indeed the Justice Department's
goal, the feds seem to have succeeded. Defense lawyers say few prominent
practitioners will touch drug cases any more -- or at least will admit
to it. "Criminal defense attorneys are an endangered species," Hirschhorn
says. Another prominent criminal defense lawyer, Steve Bronis, a partner
with Zuckerman Spaeder in Miami, says he hasn't accepted a drug case in
seven years.
A broader problem,
according to the South Florida defense bar, is that the government also
is scrutinizing legal fees paid by those charged with white-collar crimes
such as health care fraud and securities fraud.
In 1998, Hirschhorn
battled federal prosecutors in Orlando, Fla., over the source of legal
fees paid to him by a man accused of defrauding an insurance company out
of $380 million. Hirschhorn ultimately convinced prosecutors that the source
of the funds was the client's refinancing of his house and lawful wire
transfers. Hirschhorn's fees, which reached seven figures, still are undergoing
scrutiny by a receiver for the insurance company.
Reuben Cahn, chief
assistant to the federal public defender in Miami, angrily argues that
the U.S. Attorney's pre-conviction seizure of defendants' assets and its
targeting of defense attorneys essentially is forcing wealthy defendants
to turn to public defenders for representation. The problem, he says, is
that the P.D.'s office is supposed to represent the indigent and already
is stretched thin.
"It's galling," Cahn
says. "The U.S. Attorney's office has 221 regular attorneys and 40 special
attorneys. We have 49 lawyers. It's a struggle to provide good representation
to everyone."
To make sure the
feds won't object to their collecting legal fees from "hot" clients, several
criminal defense attorneys say they routinely meet with the line prosecutor
in the case before accepting the client. But that is no guarantee of safe
passage. In his opening statement, prosecutor Rubino acknowledged that
Neil Taylor had met beforehand with the prosecutor in the Falcon/Magluta
case to discuss his fees before taking on representation of the two defendants.
But Taylor still was prosecuted.
Defense lawyers have
differing views of Taylor's prosecution. Some chalk it up to an obsession
by the U.S. Attorney's office with the Falcon/Magluta case. But others
hint at bad blood between Taylor and Paul Pelletier, chief of the economic
crimes division of the U.S. Attorney's office. Taylor had filed two internal
misconduct complaints at the Justice Department against Pelletier, as well
as two complaints with the Florida Bar.
Sharpstein finds
the government's prosecution of Taylor "highly offensive." He argues that
Taylor complied with every aspect of the IRS reporting requirements, not
only identifying couriers but also writing Magluta's name on IRS reporting
forms.
FEELING THEIR
PAIN
The defense bar says
recent U.S. Attorneys, including U.S. Attorney Guy Lewis and his predecessors,
Tom Scott and Kendall Coffey, have been very open to discussing the fee
issue with defense attorneys. "Guy takes a long, hard look at investigating
lawyers," says Bronis. "He truly feels the angst that the bar feels when
these cases are brought."
The real problem,
defense lawyers contend, is that line prosecutors dig in their heels and
refuse to drop cases against attorneys.
Several of the lawyers
also complain that the U.S. Attorney's office in Miami is selective in
targeting lawyers, and won't go after the most prominent figures in the
defense bar.
But despite the threat
of having their fees seized and facing criminal charges and disbarment,
some defense lawyers say they won't be intimidated into giving up representation
of clients in need of counsel.
"I'm proud to be
a defense lawyer," said Josefsberg in his emotional opening statement in
Taylor's trial. "I'm proud to represent the Constitution. This case is
about being a criminal defense lawyer. In China and Cuba, you still can't
get one." |