| Line 44: |
Line 44: |
| | | | |
| | The bulk of Judge Lagoa's opinions were as an appellate judge in Florida. Among roughly 450 decisions she wrote from that bench, only one was related to [[abortion]]. In that case the estate of a victim of an abortion sued a cruise liner which did not perform the abortion. In a decision from which it is virtually impossible to infer her views about legalized abortion, Judge Lagoa held in part for the shipowner, and in part for the estate of the victim. ''See'' ''Flueras v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.'', 69 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011). | | The bulk of Judge Lagoa's opinions were as an appellate judge in Florida. Among roughly 450 decisions she wrote from that bench, only one was related to [[abortion]]. In that case the estate of a victim of an abortion sued a cruise liner which did not perform the abortion. In a decision from which it is virtually impossible to infer her views about legalized abortion, Judge Lagoa held in part for the shipowner, and in part for the estate of the victim. ''See'' ''Flueras v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.'', 69 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011). |
| | + | |
| | + | == Rarely dissents == |
| | + | |
| | + | Judge Lagoa has dissented in less than 1% of her cases, and has only 10 published dissents in her entire judicial career. This is in contrast with Chief Justice [[William Rehnquist]], who dissented so much that he was nicknamed the "Lone Ranger." |
| | + | |
| | + | Judge Lagoa's ten dissents are on a variety of issues, but one notable one was one against [[judicial supremacy]] by a trial court in holding an attorney in criminal contempt: |
| | + | {{cquote|"[T]he power to adjudge anyone with contempt is always to be exercised with care and circumspection." ''State v. Clemmons'', 150 So. 2d 231, 234 (Fla. 1963). |
| | + | |
| | + | [J]udges should approach the possible exercise of this unique power with the same hesitant caution and wariness one would use in picking up a glowing ember. It must be used only rarely and with circumspection. The provocation must never be slight, doubtful, or of shifting interpretations. The occasion should be real and necessary, not murky, and not ameliorated in some less formal manner. |
| | + | |
| | + | ''Woods'', 987 So. 2d at 676 (quoting ''Schenck v. State'', 645 So. 2d 71, 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (citations omitted)). |
| | + | Here, the requisite proof required for direct criminal contempt is sorely lacking. Because the record fails to support a finding of direct criminal contempt on both charged offenses, I would grant the petition for writ of [[habeas corpus]], and remand with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment and sentence for direct criminal contempt.}} |
| | + | ''Michaels v. Loftus'', 139 So. 3d 324, 336 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014 (Lagoa, J., dissenting). |
| | | | |
| | === Ruling against broad felon voting === | | === Ruling against broad felon voting === |