Chemical Free Body

​GENERAL FLYNN’S ATTORNEY FILES CLAIM THAT JUDGE’S ATTEMPT TO KEEP CASE GOING IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Attorneys for Michael Flynn on Monday asked a federal appeals court to reject U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan’s request for the court’s full slate of judges to rehear his case against the immediate dismissal of the criminal case against the former national security advisor.

In a 29-page filing in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Flynn’s lead defense attorney Sidney Powell accused Sullivan of attempting to “hijack” the case, arguing the judge has no standing to petition the circuit court for a rehearing of a mandamus order and claiming that allowing him to do so would be “unconstitutional.”

“No federal circuit has countenanced rehearing of a mandamus on petition by a district judge,” Powell wrote. “Judge Sullivan has no cognizable interest in the case.

“The district court exceeded its constitutional authority by appointing amicus to work against General Flynn after the parties agreed to dismissal. The Constitution and all precedent applying or analyzing Fed. R. Crim. P. 48(a) mandate dismissal on the robust substantive motion of the government—every case,” Powell wrote.

“Judge Sullivan’s stubborn disagreement with the Government’s decision to dismiss the case does not confer the right to contest it himself or through his amicus. His actions smack of vindictive animus against General Flynn and judicial overreach that have no place in America’s justice system. No precedent even suggests a ‘hearing’ on a substantial government motion to dismiss. Not one,” Powell added.

For more information visit our friends at Law & Crime.

5 1 vote
Article Rating

You Might Like

Leave a Reply

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
×
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: