Judge Animadverts on Unassimilable Reasoning

Call us bumptious — or captious, even — but it seems that a linguistically cumbrous paragraph in Senior Ninth Circuit Judge Ferdinand Fernandez’s adjectively convoluted Tuesday dissent (.pdf) is mere logomachy.

In disaffirming the majority’s opinion that a trial judge improperly used federal sentencing guidelines — and therefore sentenced an alleged methamphetamine dealer to an uncondign punishment — the famously pedantic Fernandez wrote that “while I cannot say that I am in disagreement with the presumption exegesis in the per curiam opinion, I do not join it. Whatever other readers of the opinion might think of it, whether they consider its reasoning eximious or exiguous, I deem it extraneous. It cannot affect my decision of this case."

Would that every jurist were in concord with his contumacy against superfluity.

— Justin Scheck


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: