The Dan Markel Case: Katie Magbanua, Sentenced
Plus updates on Charlie Adelson, including a preview of his defense.
Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking on the button below. Thanks!
Last month marked eight long years since the murder of law professor Dan Markel on July 18, 2014. And even though not everyone involved in his murder has been brought to justice, progress has been made since this time a year ago.
Two events took place this past Friday, July 29. You can access courtroom video footage for them via the Tallahassee Democrat/YouTube.
First, Katherine Magbanua, 37, was sentenced to life imprisonment for her role in Markel’s murder. Because Magbanua was convicted in May of first-degree murder, a life sentence was mandatory.
Under Florida, law, there are two possible punishments for first-degree murder: the death penalty or life imprisonment without parole. The prosecution had previously decided not to seek the death penalty for Magbanua, who was neither the person who pulled the trigger nor the mastermind behind the plot, so life was the only option on the table. (Had the prosecution sought the death penalty, additional procedures would have applied at Magbanua’s trial, such as use of a “death-qualified” jury.)
Before Magbanua was sentenced, Dan Markel’s sister, Shelly Markel, gave a powerful victim-impact statement, as reported by Karl Etters of the Tallahassee Democrat:
Shelly Markel described her and her brother’s childhood together. She played the role of older sister “with pride.” She had hoped their own families could grow up and make memories together.
“Instead, the order of our world has been cruelly reversed,” Shelly Markel said. “I am sad, I am lonely, I am angry that Danny was taken from me….”
“Eight years he has not been with us, and in those eight years we continue to suffer. We continue to grieve,” she said. “His murder has been horrible for me and my family. Shocking, surreal, and so hard to understand. His future was cut short. Imagine what was ahead of him.”
Shelly Markel asked Judge Robert Wheeler to impose the maximum sentence for Magbanua on the two other crimes of conviction besides first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder and solicitation of murder.
Katie Magbanua did not address the court. Her lawyer, Tara Kawass, argued in favor of the minimum sentence of 26 years for the conspiracy and solicitation counts, to run concurrently with the life sentence:
Kawass referenced the numerous letters of support issued for Magbanua and said her thoughts often turn to Markel.
“She does think about Dan Markel every single day. She does think about his kids every single day,” Kawass said. “Not a day goes by that she doesn’t express how her heart is broken for the Markel family. One thing that I can say that Ms. Magbanua hopes and prays for is that justice is ongoing and has not been reached in this case, and she wants each and every person who had a hand in this and knows something about this to be brought to justice.”
This is a bit rich, considering Magbanua’s role in Markel’s murder. But it appears that Magbanua is sticking to her story that she wasn’t involved, instead of expressing remorse or seeking to cooperate, which remained theoretically possible even after she was convicted.
As a practical matter, Magbanua’s cooperation isn’t happening. I recently appeared on the Surviving the Survivor podcast, along with John Singer and Judy Tseng, two other lawyers who have followed the Markel case closely, and host Joel Waldman asked us about possible cooperation from Magbanua. Singer and I explained that at this point, the prosecution doesn’t need Magbanua—lead prosecutor Georgia Cappleman has a strong case against alleged mastermind Charlie Adelson based on the existing evidence—and Magbanua doesn’t have much to offer anyway. Unless she has some hard evidence of Adelson’s involvement that’s not already known to the prosecution, all Magbanua has to offer is testimony—and considering how she lied on the stand during her own two trials, she wouldn’t be the most credible witness at Adelson’s trial.
Judge Wheeler went with the prosecution. He added two 30-year sentences on top of Magbanua’s life sentence, to run consecutively.
Magbanua can file a notice of appeal within 30 days of sentencing. Tara Kawass told Judge Wheeler that Magbanua is indigent and asked for counsel to be appointed on appeal, and Judge Wheeler appointed the public defender’s office for that purpose. (For years there has been speculation that Magbanua’s legal fees at the trial-court level were being paid by the Adelsons, but according to Kawass and her co-counsel, Christopher DeCoste, they were paid by Magbanua’s family.)
The sentencing hearing concluded with Judge Wheeler wishing Katie Magbanua good luck, as she wiped tears from her face.
This brings us to the second event that took place on Friday: a case-management conference in the prosecution of Charles Adelson, 45, held in the same courtroom less than an hour after Magbanua’s sentencing. It was Adelson’s first appearance in court since his arrest in April, and the once high-flying dentist, a wealthy playboy who used to tool around South Florida in a Ferrari, was shackled and clad in a blue jumpsuit, with “Leon County Detention” written in large letters on the back.
Adelson was represented at the hearing by former federal prosecutor Daniel Rashbaum—who replaced Adelson’s longtime counsel, David Oscar Marcus, in May—and one of Rashbaum’s law partners, Kathryn Meyers. Once again, lead prosecutor Georgia Cappleman represented the state.
As is typical with status conferences, the hearing was brief, under 15 minutes, and non-substantive. The lawyers and Judge Wheeler discussed discovery, the process in which the two sides exchange evidence and other information, and noted no disputes or problems thus far. (Florida allows criminal defendants greater discovery than many other jurisdictions, which explains Judge Wheeler’s reference to possible depositions.)
They then talked about scheduling, including a timetable for trial. Judge Wheeler initially proposed holding the next status conference in January 2023, but after Cappleman and Rashbaum said they hope to start trial as early as January or at least in the first quarter of the new year, Judge Wheeler said they would schedule the next status conference for November or early December of this year, date to be determined. Cappleman estimated that the trial will last for about three weeks (since she felt that two weeks wasn’t quite enough for Magbanua’s trial).
Dan Rashbaum asked Judge Wheeler to schedule an Arthur hearing for Adelson, who has been in custody since his arrest in April. Named after the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Arthur (1980), an Arthur hearing is a bail hearing in a case where the law presumes the defendant will remain in custody until trial because he has been arrested for a “non-bondable” offense like murder. Judge Wheeler granted the request, with Adelson’s Arthur hearing to take place within the next 30 to 60 days.
In his Arthur motion and in-court remarks, Dan Rashbaum gave a preview of Charlie Adelson’s defense, arguing that the state hasn’t developed sufficient proof against Adelson to deny him pretrial release on bail. Rashbaum cited 2016 statements by then-State Attorney Willie Meggs dismissing theories of Adelson’s involvement as “speculation,” which is how Meggs explained why the state wasn’t moving against Adelson at that time. Rashbaum then argued that nothing has changed since then:
Rashbaum said the “new” evidence that led to Adelson's arrest, a secretly recorded video by undercover FBI agents of his client and Magbanua talking at a Miami restaurant Dolce Vita, only helps to exonerate Adelson. In the video, which was central to Magbanua’s conviction, Adelson repeatedly says he had nothing to do with Markel's murder while the pair discuss how to handle an undercover FBI agent they believed was either a blackmailer or a cop.
I disagree with Rashbaum’s assessment of the so-called “Dolce Vita recording.” As I explained back in April, there’s plenty of incriminating material in this recording—and the jury that convicted Katie Magbanua apparently agreed. As one of her attorneys, Chris DeCoste, told the Tallahassee Democrat after her conviction, “There’s things said on there that you can’t resolve…. There are things in [the] Dolce Vita [recording] that I’m sure that for the jury were determining factors.”
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Daniel Rashbaum is a talented lawyer, and jury trials can be unpredictable—like Magbanua’s first trial, which ended with a hung jury. Those of us who were shocked and dismayed by that mistrial for Magbanua will remain anxious until we hear Charlie Adelson pronounced guilty in open court.
In the meantime, though, we can at least be grateful for the sentencing of Katherine Magbanua. I’ll close with a statement from Orin Snyder and Matt Benjamin of Gibson Dunn on behalf of their longtime clients, Dan Markel’s parents, Ruth and Phil Markel.
“Dan Markel was brutally murdered more than eight years ago. Today’s sentencing of Katharine Magbanua marks another important step toward accountability and justice. We are grateful for the efforts of law enforcement and the State Attorney’s Office in advancing the criminal case against Charles Adelson and in continuing to pursue all those responsible for Dan’s murder.”
UPDATE (8/3/2022, 2:43 p.m.): Katie Magbanua’s lawyer, Tara Kawass, gave an interesting and extensive interview after both proceedings concluded. Some highlights (approximate times in the video clip noted parenthetically):
she mentions that even though Magbanua will be represented on appeal by the public defender’s office, Magbanua’s trial team will work closely with public defender Jessica Yeary on any appeal (0:10);
Kawass acknowledges that getting a jury verdict overturned on appeal is even harder than getting an acquittal (0:51);
in response to questions about Magbanua possibly cooperating, Kawass says, somewhat cryptically, “that’s up to the state—the ball’s in their court” (1:00);
Kawass states that Magbanua has not attempted to talk to or cooperate with the prosecution since the verdict, since she has not been “in a very good state of mind” recently (1:15);
in response to additional questions about whether Magbanua might reveal all that she knows, Kawass says, “I don’t think the court is the audience at this point, it would be the prosecution” (1:44);
when asked about Wendi Adelson, Kawass is guarded, noting that Wendi is a fellow member of the Florida bar, but she does say that her views on Wendi evolved between the first and second trials, and she referred people to her cross-examination of Jeffrey Lacasse to get a sense of her views on Wendi (16:18); and
when asked to comment on the comment of Charlie Adelson’s lawyer that the truth is on Charlie’s side, Kawass struggles to maintain a straight face before saying “no comment” and then asking rhetorically, “Will the truth be coming from his sister?” (22:50).
Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; and (3) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below.