Anna Nicole Smith Trial: Steve Sadow Asks for Charges to be Dismissed, Lowered or a New Trial
Posted by Rose in All Things Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith, Beverly Hills, Celebrity Trials, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Debunking the myths on ALL cases related to Anna Nicole, Dr. Khris, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, High Proflie Trials, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Howard K Stern, J. Christopher Smith, J. Christopher Smith Esq, Steve Sadow
Howard K. Stern’s lawyers, Steven H. Sadow and J. Christopher Smith, filed a seven-page court filing asking that that the two felony conspiracy charges, of which Howard K. Stern was convicted of on October 28, 2010, be dismissed stating that; “There is no substantial evidence to support guilt.’
Sadow and Smith contend that; “The district attorney selectively targeted Howard K. Stern for prosecution,” although “using so-called ‘false names’ on medications intended for well-(known) celebrities is common practice in Los Angeles to protect privacy, and prescribing doctors, much less third parties, have never been criminally prosecuted under the false name statutes.”
For what appears to be a safety net the defense team filed a separate Motion with Judge Robert Perry which asks the judge to grant a new trial for Stern or to reduce the charges to misdemeanors.
Stern — who had been Smith’s boyfriend, confidant and attorney — was acquitted of seven other charges, including unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance.
Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, a psychiatrist who had lived next door to Smith in Studio City, was convicted of two conspiracy charges and one count each of unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance and unlawfully obtaining a prescription by giving a false name.
Stern was never charged with Smith’s Feb. 8, 2007, accidental drug overdose death in Florida at age 39.
Stern and Eroshevich are due back before Judge Robert J. Perry for sentencing on Jan 6, 2011.
Sandi Gibbons of the District Attorney’s Office say Stern and Eroshevich could face anywhere from probation to about three years in prison.
November 30, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Invite/Request to Dismiss Felony Convictions
November 30, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Motion to change felony convictions to Misdemeanors or in the alternative for a New Trial.
Be sure to participate in our COMMUNITY , get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the community where you can discuss things about the cases in a debate area of the site.
Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following:
We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL
©Rose Turner
November 30, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.
Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
Entries (RSS)
A little sometihing regarding Judge Seidlin
http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2010/11/judge_larry_seidlin_puts_on_the_ritz.php
Ok here are the new papers they are also listed in the article:
November 30, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Invite/Request to Dismiss Felony Convictions
http://www.rosespeaks.com/downloads/ANS/criminal/11-30-10-Stern-Request-Dismiis-Conviction.pdf
November 30, 2010 Howard K. Stern’s Motion to change felony convictions to Misdemeanor or in the alternative for a New Trial.
http://www.rosespeaks.com/downloads/ANS/criminal/11-30-10-Stern-Motion-New-Trial.pdf
Sammy we got to love :clint: Judge Larrreeeeee! Something about that name brings a smile
to my face, 
LARRRREEEEEEEEEEEE!
John
John????, WHAT???.. :clint: Here we go again, JUST SAY IT!!!!…..Please
This is all Bullshit charges and everyone knows it.. I hope that Judge Perry responds quickly and he corrects this.
I mean convictions.
Sammy 1——The
Judge,now has a reason to 
.That turkey picked the right side for his calibration.”Honor amoung thieves”. 
The defense had every chance to put on a defense. They chose not to. Simple as that. It doesn’t matter what they thought the judge was going to do. They still had the chance to do it and didn’t. So, I don’t think saying they didn’t have a chance because of what they were thinking isn’t exactly correct.
Roxanne [9] I agree they had their chance to call [more] witness or cross-examine the ones the State had on the stand but they chose not to do any of that. I never understood why they didn’t
With that said…
I kinda figured something like this was coming, meaning Sadow/Smith wouldn’t wait until Jan to see what Perry’s decision/sentencing was gonna be.
I agree, Roxanne. The defense had a chance to put on a defense. IMO, the defense team did not want to put any of their clients on the stand and take a chance on what the prosecution would do to them. Howard didn’t do so well in the Fl court and showed that he lied while under oath. (This is not about all who lied in FL).
Did Dr Kapoor break the law, for sure. But he was consistant. He used a known name for Anna’s prescription. Dr E. put drugs in her own name, in Stern’s name and in a woman’s name that didn’t even know her personally. That woman had no idea what had happened when dr E did that. The same cannot be said for Stern. There, that is the difference between all three of them. This is the reason why I believe Kapoor walked.
As far as Judge Seidlin, IMO, he ruled corrrectly on where Anna wanted to be buried. She would have wanted to be right next to her son. Maybe the whole goal was to somehow make sure that Howard could not go back to the Bahamas so that a suit can be filed due to the fact that “Anna and Daniel have been buried away from family” and no one but TOURISTS to visit their graves. In order to get the attention drawn to himself again, he mentions Anna and now states that he believes Stern killed Anna. Doesn’t matter, he wanted to sell books. Most people understand that.
Again. the only one that is innocent in this entire saga is Dannielynn. She is the one that should count in everyone’s eyes. Sadly, she has not been.
Sammy1 [1]
he used that elderly woman’s credit card? IMO Seidlin is a POS, nothing more nothing less!
DG [11] I agree…
“the only one that is innocent in this entire saga is Dannielynn. She is the one that should count in everyone’s eyes. Sadly, she has not been.”
DG
Who didn’t lie in Fl????????
I know Rox. That was my point. I just didn’t want to hear how one lied, others the lies weren’t so bad…. each one on the stand had an agenda. Larry with the DNA sample, Virgie with the body and Stern with trying to make sure Anna was going to be buried in the Bahamas. Each one had something to gain.
I think the Bahamas did a great job in finding out who the father of Dannielynn was. That one issue was the most important one, imo. It really doesn’t matter what would have happened if Anna had lived. Maybe by this time, the adults would have consider the needs of the child. One could have hoped. By the looks of things Dannielynn looks happy. I just pray that when the day comes, the little girl finds out all there is/was about her mother, father, brother and everyone else, she is wise enough to figure things out for herself.
Judge S wanted to make a name for himself and he certainly did. Everyone in America knows his name is associated with the FL Hearing and the circus it became. Yes, the right decision was made but the road getting there was ridiculous. He had one decision to make and it didn’t require getting into drugs, duffle bags, video tapes, theft, DNA, bank accounts, housing, wills, estate planning and nor did it require 20 attorneys. Anna made her decision months before when she purchased 4 buriel plots in the Bahamas.
While I will agree with most of what you posted, I do believe that the DNA was a very important issue. With all the stuff that had happened before Anna died, I can understand the need for Anna’s DNA example to be ruled on.
Hello everyone. It has been so quiet with the Holiday weekend.
I was just reading the legal doc…in the first one.. line 22-23. His name was on a non opiate drug… what drug did they use his name on? I never thought to look at that..and used his own name..
Thankyou Rose for these legal documents…I am glad that Howard isn’t just going to wait until January…reading them it points out a lot of facts that were not brought to trial.
heath [18] “His name was on a non opiate drug… what drug did they use his name on?”
REPOST
_________
“SWIMS, do you remember exactly what prescriptions were in HKS’s name? Thanks.
“The jury’s guilty verdicts on the counts one and three conspiracies were limited to the false
name target offenses for prescribing non-opiate controlled substances involving Mr. Stern’s own name.”
The motions/points were well written and concise!
Posted at 6:39 PM on Nov 30, 2010 by jm
*****
Chloral Hydrate and Clonazepam.
Posted at 1:20 PM on Dec 1, 2010 by Only swim in the Ocean”
Thanks Beth..
The Chloral Hydrate is a sedative and Clonazepam is an anti convulsive drug
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonazepam
We know she had seizures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloral_hydrate why take such a crappy drug.. better on the market surely.
Are these the drugs addictive?
opiates would be narcotic pain medications like lortab, vicodin, percocet, etc……
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101202/ap_en_tv/us_anna_nicole_smith
Smith psych seeks dismissal or reduced charges
By LINDA DEUTSCH AP Special Correspondent
LOS ANGELES December 1, 2010 (AP)
“A psychiatrist convicted of prescribing drugs to the late Playboy model Anna Nicole Smith under a false name has asked a judge to either dismiss her convictions or reduce the charges to misdemeanors.
Attorney Bradley Brunon argued in motion filed Wednesday that Dr. Khristine Eroshevich acted in good faith to help a fragile, suffering person. He says prosecutors used inflammatory and sensational evidence in an effort to win Eroshevich’s conviction in a high-publicity case.
A lawyer for co-defendant Howard K. Stern filed a similar motion earlier this week.
Smith died of a drug overdose in 2007, but the defendants were not charged with her death.
Stern and Eroshevich face sentencing Jan. 6. A third defendant, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, was acquitted of all charges.”
Roxanne # 9, I could not agree more but I think they had a strategy and their defense was presented via the prosecution. The prosecution witnesses recanted and/or admitted to lying (making things up)and they even brought in a Google expert, I think maybe they felt because the prosecutions own witnesses were so inept/weak as prosecution witnesses it was not necessary for defense witnesses. I think that was their strategy as defense. imo.
Also Roxanne, I completely agree with the last discussion that you stated about time running out on the TX lawsuit, maybe O’Q would have tried to come at them in another way but even if O’Q was alive that case was at the end after all the summery judgements. Great points you made, kudos.
Heath—-You question,why take such a crappy drug”?there are better on the market,is one I have been asking for a number of years.That is the one med that did not belong anywhere near Anna Nicole,and is my sticking point with Dr E.Maybe Anna requested it,I sure hope it was not something Anna asked for a got,in either way,in a depressed Anna,CH was a dangerous sleep med,as Anna wanted to be like MM who died of CH,
Liann
I agree. I think we were all pretty much thinking the same thing about the “witnesses” but in the end that jury did take what evidence was shown, right or wrong, and convicted HKS and Dr. E with it. I think it stunned a lot of people. At least it surprised me. I didn’t think they would convict HKS but I always said that I thought Dr. E was in some trouble and it wouldn’t surprise me if she were convicted. I do think she was honestly doing what she thought she could to help but as I’ve said before, she was just to close to the situation to be effective.
Anna had taken CH in the past BEFORE Dr. E ever prescribed it for her. I’m pretty sure Anna told her what she had taken and what she wanted.
Will be interesting to see what come out of this!!!!!!
Rose,
Are you going to be getting Dr. Eroshevich’s motion for download here?
Thanks.
Beth [29] We’ll try.
Thank you Ken.
Here is a link for you and Rose to each fill out for a chance at winning some great gifts from Ellen’s show!
http://ellen.warnerbros.com/12days/#entergiveaway
* the 12 days of Christmas give a way is back… I cannot believe another year has flown by!
Good Luck! >> I am having anyone over 18 in my family enter everyday!
HELLO ALL! Hope holiday plans/shopping are going well. Once again computer is “fixed” and internet connection is working. Have alot of catching up to do. Good health to all. Noni
I was having lunch with several police officers today and a defense lawyer, and the conversation came up as to what prison Stern and Eroshevich was going to do time in
. The Federal system has nice vacation type locations to house low level felons, unlike the state. The state does have nice fire camps 
and stuff like that for low level felons to do short stints, it will be interesting to see were they go 
. Sometimes they will try and keep it rather close to ‘home’ so that relatives can come and visit.
Back when I worked for CDC there were few options, not anymore, there are lots of prisons and camps for convicts to do their time. We will see, I had some thoughts nothing from the horses mouth however!
John
Hi John [33] – after reading your comment…do you think Howard (or any one else found guilty in this sham of a trial) might actually do some “time”? I understand all of the workings behind this trial to try to discredit and/or set up certain parties for further prosecution … but based on the actual convictions at this time I just can’t see anyone actually being sentenced to time behind the bars. Curious as to what your comments alluded to. I am playing “catch up” as to what has happened after the trial so excuse me if your wording referred to something I am not up to speed about. Happy Holidays to you!
I don’t think either of them will serve anytime. Judge Perry needs to put a three-piece spicy on this bs and bring it to an end. This was nothing more than a political ploy and I believe he knows it.
#35 you right, but the bad part
is that Jerry Brown got elected and I dont think the Governor is going to let this slide……just me thinking!
John