by Mike Sharkey
Staff Writer
Curtis Johnson is in federal prison in Jesup, Ga. He has a lengthy rap sheet and he’s in the process of serving a 185-month sentence.
Johnson’s sentence stems from a third conviction for trafficking ammunition across state lines as a convicted felon. The offense can be prosecuted on both the state and federal level. According to his attorney, the prosecution chose to try Johnson on the federal level because, if convicted, the sentence would be longer. Sort of the three strikes and you are out.
Oct. 6, Johnson will get his last day in court. But, he won’t be there. While Johnson is pacing in his cell, local federal public defender Lisa Call will argue on his behalf in front of the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. Call is set to argue that Johnson’s sentence that was handed down July 7, 2007 in the U.S. District Court and upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta in May of last year is too long. The focus of Call’s argument is on whether the courts interpreted Johnson’s crime on the state or federal level. That interpretation could have an impact on his ultimate sentence.
If Johnson’s nervous that day, no one will notice. If Call’s nervous, she’s going to have to take a deep breath and remind herself that she’s prepared.
“This is a once in a lifetime chance,” said Call, who has been with the Office of the Federal Public Defender, Middle District of Florida Jacksonville Office since 2000. “Very few attorneys actually get to argue in front of the Supreme Court. I want to do a good job.”
Call is from Ohio but moved to Tampa while in junior high school. She went to the University of Florida for both her undergraduate degree in Finance and for law school. She graduated in 1991 and went to work in private practice for local attorney Gerry Bettman. Nine years later, a position opened up in the Federal Public Defender’s Office.
“When the position opened, I really wanted it,” she said. “I’d never leave this job.”
According to Call, the Supreme Court gets about 10,000 petitions annually and only hears about 100 arguments. In October of last year, Call sent her client’s petition to the high court for consideration. As the months passed, Call said she actually began to get her hopes up. Petitions are evaluated through a conference preview process and those cases with merit continue through the system. In this case, the no-news-is-good-news theory is true.
“I was on vacation the Monday when we found out,” said Call, who admitted she didn’t even return the first couple of calls from her office.
The Supreme Court granted Call’s petition Feb. 27 and she’s been just about single-minded since.
“For right now, this is it,” she said. “My office has been extraordinary about giving me time and taking other cases for me. I have gotten great support in the office.”
Call will go before the nine-member court Oct. 6, just the court’s second day back in session. However, she will head up to D.C. several days ahead of time to participate in a handful of moot courts. One of those moot courts is through Georgetown University. There, Call will deliver her best “preseason” 30-minute argument after which she’ll be evaluated. Call said she expects — and wants — to be told what areas of her argument are strong and what areas are weak. It’ll be up to her, at that point, to make adjustments.
Several local attorneys have appeared before the Supreme Court. Although he’s no longer in Jacksonville, Florida Solicitor General Scott Makar was in front of the Supreme Court in March of last year. Formerly of the Office of General Counsel, Makar argued a case that involved the interpretation of the Florida Statutes on tax exemptions under the bankruptcy code. (See related article on page 12A).
“The case had courts split across the country,” he said. “We won 7-2.”
The soft-spoken Makar said there are three keys to success in front of the Supreme Court.
“Preparation, preparation, preparation. As long as you are prepared everything will be just fine,” he said. “There are very few questions that they will ask that you can’t respond to if you are prepared well.”
Still, Makar said the setting is unlike any other in the profession. In addition to the pure enormity, there are factors not experienced in any other court.
“It certainly is intense. It’s probably the most intense legal experience one can have in the courtroom,” he said. “The questions come one after another. My advice is that you can’t get frustrated especially if you don’t get to completely answer.
“It’s sort of like a duel with nine people with nine swords. You are like a ping pong ball in a room with nine folks with nine paddles. The 30 minutes will go by so fast.
“The nine justices are right there in front of you. You can almost reach out there and touch them.”
Call says she’s ready. She’ll be joined by her boss Donna Elm, the office’s chief assistant Jim Skuthan, head of the appellate department Rosemary Cakmis and her paralegal Steven Kruer.
“There’s still more I want to do (to be prepared). I tend to be a perfectionist, so I want to be prepared,” said Call.
And her chances?
“The fact that we have gotten this far says something,” she said. “It says it’s very important and something the court wants to look at.”
356-2466