David P. Folmar's license was suspended by the North Carolina State Bar on November 14, 2003 for "Failure to Comply with Continuing Legal Education Requirements" yet he remained a practicing prosecutor for the Middle District of North Carolina until March 6, 2009. During his time as prosecutor he appeared before the court and filed many documents claiming to be a licensed prosecuting attorney. In other words, he committed prejury and fraud on numerous occasions.
A person would think that an illegal and unlawful prosecutor would be charged criminally and that all convictions obtained by him during his reign as an unlicensed prosecutor would be overturned. But that is not the case. To the best of my knowledge Mr. Folmar is not going to be charged in criminal court and after doing a little research I learned that criminal defendants do not have a constitutional right to be prosecuted by a licensed prosecutor.
In a case called Munoz V. Keane, petitioners sought writs of habeas corpus primarily on the grounds that their prosecution by an individual not admitted to the bar of New York or any other state violated the Due Process Clausee of the United States Constitution. The court wrote: "A prosecution conducted by an unlicensed attorney does noet violate a defendant's right to fair procedure or deprive him of constitutional safeguards guaranteed under the Due Process Clause. The Due Process Clause requires a fair trial, not a perfect one". The court further wrote: "Prosecution by an individual not admitted to any bar did not violate due process". (U.S. Dist: ct. and cir. 777 supp. 282, Nov. 4, 1991).
When I read Munoz V. Keane I thought about a segment that I watched on 60 minutes about a guy in Missouri who falsely claimed to be an FBI agent. For months he ran around a small town with local law enforcement arresting suspected drug dealeres until one day somebody finally figured out that the guy was just some nutcase vigilante. He was taken into custody, all of the cases that he worked on were thrown out, and those he arrested were suing the local police deparment. In my opinion, there is no difference between a fake cop and fake (unlicensed) prosecutor - both commit crimes in a effort to convict others. Yet the court in Munoz V. Keane seemed to have the same attitude about illegal prosecutors as U.S. Attoreny Anne Mills Wagoner. No biggy.
In her letter to Judge Beaty, U.S. Attorney Anne Mills Wagoner also writes "this office is attempting to compile an additional list of all closed cases before this court which AUSA Folmar was the assigned prosecutor while he had no valid, active state bar license. That list will be provided to the court upon completion and defense counsel of each of the cases will be notified as well".
One of the lawyers that U.S. Attorney Wagoner notified was Brian Michael Aus, a federal public defender, who represented an inmate that is currently being housed at FCI Butner, named Lance "Big Baby" Williams. Williams, who is serving 15 years sentence for 52.8 grams of crack cocaine, was told by Public Denfeder Aus that the man who prosecuted him, AUSA Folmar, had no valid bar license and sent him a copy of U.S. Attorney Wagoner's letter to the court. (See attached). When Mr. Williams asked his attorney what that meant, Mr. Aus told him that "we'll just have to wait and see".
Public defenders and any other lawyers that had clients who were prosecuted by unlicensed AUSA Folmar should not just be sitting around and twiddling their thumbs while U.S. Attorney Wagoner former illegal prosecutors cases stick, they should be fighting like hell for their clients. They should be pushing to have all charges against them dropped, filing lawsuits against the U.S. Attorney's office and Mr. Folmar in his individual capacity and demand that Mr. Folmar be prosecuted.
Our Attorney General Eric Holder said "Public confidence in our justice system and in the Department of Justice can only be preserved when prosecutors adhere to the most strigent legal and ethical standards". Everytime taht former unlicensed AUSA David P. Folmar obtained an indictment, appeared before the court, signed a legal document or recieved a paycheck from the government for his services as a genuine prosecutor he committed a crime. He should be held criminally liable and every conviction that he obtained while unlicensed should be overturned and Attorney General Eric Holder's office should oversee the process.
If you share my views on this subject please contact the U.S. Attorney General's office and U.S. Attorney Anna Wagoner and demand that justice be done.
--------------------------------------------------------
Transcribed letter sent to Honorable James A. Beaty, Jr.
--------------------------------------------------------
Hon. James A. Beaty, Jr.
Chief United States District Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of North Carolina
251 North Main St., Suite 248
Winston-Salem, NC 27120
Chief United States District Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of North Carolina
251 North Main St., Suite 248
Winston-Salem, NC 27120
VIA FASMILE (336/631-5004) and U.S. MAIL
Re: Notice of Assitants United States Attorney David P. Folmar's Suspended North Carolina State Bar Status at the Time of His Appearance before the Court and Behalf of the United States.
Dear Chief Judge Beaty:
On Monday, March 9, 2009, Assistant United States Attorney ("AUSA") David P. Folmar was relieved of practicing law for the United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District ot North Carolina. This Office received and e-mail from an employee of the North Carolina State bar on Friday, March 6, 2009, at 5:26 p.m., indicating that AUSA Folmer's North Carolina Bar License had been administratively suspended on November 14, 2003, for failure to comply with continuing Legal Education requirements. On March 9, 2009, this office confirmed the information in the e-mail with the North Carolina State Bar and, as a result, determined that AUSA Folmer had been practicing without any valid, active state bar license since November 14, 2003.
In appearing before and filing documents with this Court, AUSA Folmar represented himself as a licensed attorney. This letter is provided to correct that inaccurate representation. This Office has no reason to believe that AUSA Folmar's appearance before the Court while his North Carolina Bar License was administratively suspended had any material effect on any case, but has undertaken this notification because of the importance this Office places upon candor to the Court. The Circtui Executive for the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has been notified by telephone of this situation and written notification will be made to that court as well.
Enclosed please find a list of all cases pending before the Court that this Office has been able to indentify for which AUSA Folmar was the assigned prosecutor. Other AUSA will be filing subsitution of counsel forms in these cases.
A copy of this letter will be sent to defense counsel in each of the pending cases formerly assinged to AUSA Folmar and with a separate enclosure indentifying the cases handed by the attorney for which AUSA Folmar was the assigned prosecutor.
In addition, out of an abundance of caution, this Office is attempting to compile an additional list of all closed cases with this Court as to which AUSA Folmar was the assigned prosecutor while he had no valid, active state bar license. That list will be provided to the Court upon completion and defense counsel in each of those cases will be notified as well.
Sincerely,
ANNA MILLS WAGONER
United States Attorney
United States Attorney
No comments:
Post a Comment