Jury Delivers Split Verdict in Dugan Trial

Judge Hannah Dugan’s courtroom on the sixth floor of the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Photo taken by Graham Kilmer.

The jury in the federal criminal case against Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan delivered a split verdict Thursday night after more than five hours of deliberation.

Dugan faced one misdemeanor count of concealing an individual from arrest and one felony count of obstructing a federal agency proceeding. She was found guilty of the second charge, felony obstruction.

Her defense team said she will appeal the ruling.

The charges stem from an incident on April 18 when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) went to the Milwaukee County Courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, who was appearing in Dugan’s courtroom on misdemeanor battery and domestic violence charges.

The attempt to arrest Flores-Ruiz came after two other ICE arrests at the courthouse caused a public furor. When Dugan learned there were ICE agents outside her courtroom, she grabbed another circuit court judge, Kristela Cervera, and went to check if they had a judicial warrant. When they told Dugan they had an administrative warrant she sent them to Chief Judge Carl Ashley‘s office.

She returned to her courtroom and rescheduled Flores-Ruiz’s case off the record, then sent him and his attorney out of the jury door and down a hallway restricted to the public. However, the hallway still emptied into the public hallway and Flores-Ruiz was arrested by federal agents outside of the courthouse.

Throughout the trial, defense attorneys argued that Dugan did not knowingly obstruct the proceeding or conceal Flores-Ruiz from arrest. They said the courthouse was gripped by confusion and paranoia following previous ICE arrests and Dugan was attempting to make the right decision in reaction to ICE activities under difficult circumstances.

Meanwhile, federal prosecutors argued that Dugan knowingly obstructed the arrest and tried to conceal Flores-Ruiz.

Jury deliberations seemed to hinge on whether or not Dugan knew Flores-Ruiz was the subject pursued by ICE agents that day. They asked for clarification from U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman on whether or not Dugan needed to know the identity of the person on the ICE warrant.

On the first count of concealment, Adelman instructed the jury, “The defendant needed to know the identity of the subject of the warrant” to have committed the crime.

On the second count of obstruction, for which Dugan was found guilty, Adelman said, “To know of the pending proceeding the defendant needed to have sufficient knowledge about the nature of the proceeding.” (The bolded word was underlined in the jury instructions for emphasis.)

Throughout the trial, only one witness testified that Dugan may have had knowledge of who the target of the arrest was: Cervera.

The defense challenged the validity of Cervera’s testimony, arguing she was wrong and that she testified against Dugan to protect herself.

Other than Cervera’s testimony, the federal government did not provide any evidence proving Dugan knew federal agents were after Flores-Ruiz specifically.

Dugan’s defense team issued a statement following the verdict.

“While we are disappointed in today’s outcome, the failure of the prosecution to secure convictions on both counts demonstrates the opportunity we have to clear Judge Dugan’s name and show she did nothing wrong in this matter. We have planned for this potential outcome and our defense of Judge Dugan is just beginning. This trial required considerable resources to prepare for and public support for Judge Dugan’s defense fund is critical as we prepare for the next phase of this defense,” said her attorneys.

Interim U.S. Attorney General Brad Schimel told media members that the case was not political. “Some have sought to make this about a larger political battle,” Schimel said. “While this case is serious for all involved, it is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day, in a public courthouse. The defendant is certainly not evil. Nor is she a martyr for some greater cause.”

In response to a question on teh split verdict, Schimel said, “Well, it’s two different charges. The jury had to consider two different sets of elements.”

Asked whether any witnesses were offered immunity, Schimel said, “Not that I’m aware of.”

Attorney Steven Biskupic told media the defense, and Dugan, are “obviously dissappointed” with the verdict.

“The mixed verdict is the big thing from the defense perspective,” Biskupic said. ” You know, the same elements of count one are in count two… How can you find guilty there and not guilty on the first.”

For that reason the defense has asked for a post-trial briefing. “Judge hasn’t set a sentencing date, so obviously he’s going to take this seriously as well, and I would just say the case is a long way from over,” Biskupic said.

After delivering the verdict, the jury foreman briefly spoke with reporters, telling them he didn’t wish to comment at length and that he didn’t feel good. The jury followed the instructions, he said.