On Friday, January 10, 2025, the Miami Herald reported that a public defender’s motion to disqualify a judge due to alleged close ties with the Miami-Dade State Attorney was denied by an appeals court. The case centers around Melissa Quintanilla, a 28-year-old woman who was convicted of domestic battery in 2021. Quintanilla sought to challenge the impartiality of 3rd District Court of Appeal Judge Bronwyn Miller, arguing that her relationship with State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle compromised the integrity of the judicial process.

Quintanilla was found guilty of battering her former boyfriend during a dispute over their daughter’s custody at her West Kendall home. Following her conviction, she was sentenced to 12 months of probation and required to complete 50 hours of community service. In late 2023, she was taken into custody again after a judge ruled that she violated the terms of her probation. Subsequently, Quintanilla appealed the initial judgment.

Carlos Martinez, the Miami-Dade Public Defender, filed a detailed 21-page motion requesting the disqualification of Judge Miller from hearing Quintanilla’s appeal. The motion cited a series of text messages exchanged between Miller and Fernandez Rundle, which raised concerns about the judge’s impartiality. Martinez claimed that Miller was acting as a “de facto senior advisor” to the State Attorney, suggesting that her ability to remain unbiased in the case was questionable.

The appeals court summarily denied the motion without further explanation, issuing only a brief statement regarding its decision. The motion for disqualification followed a report from the Miami Herald that highlighted a pattern of communication between Miller and her former boss. These texts included discussions regarding the re-sentencing of convicted murderer Corey Smith, a case in which Miller was previously involved as a lead prosecutor.

Court records indicate that Smith was sentenced to death in 2005. However, changes in Florida’s death penalty laws in 2023 prompted a re-evaluation of his case, leading to a new hearing. The defense team for Smith had discovered a memo authored by Miller decades prior, detailing the conduct of witnesses during his original trial. Judge Miller was subsequently subpoenaed to testify about her earlier memo at Smith’s re-sentencing.

In the text messages, Miller appeared to advise Fernandez Rundle on strategies to influence the re-sentencing process, including efforts to remove Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Andrea Wolfson from the case after she had dismissed two lead state prosecutors for misconduct. Following this incident, the state announced its decision to no longer pursue the death penalty against Smith.

Martinez’s motion also highlighted the personal nature of the communications, referencing heart emojis exchanged between Miller and Fernandez Rundle, which he described as “the equivalent of electronic hugs.”

Martinez declined to provide additional comments on the motion, stating he had nothing further to contribute beyond what was submitted to the appeals court. Similarly, the public defender’s general counsel did not respond to inquiries regarding the case.

Miller’s attorney, Brian Tannebaum, opted not to comment on the specifics of the motion but noted that requests to recuse appellate judges are generally uncommon. Legal ethics expert Scott Tozian expressed surprise at the speed of the appeals court’s denial, indicating that it could lead to concerns about the judge’s impartiality in future proceedings.

 

 

Source: Miami Herald