Marshall Formby

Throughout his career, Marshall Formby served in a variety of capacities in the state of Texas. In the legal field, he is best remembered for becoming a member of the law firm of LaFont and Tudor in 1952. The firm, which is now known as LaFont, Formby & Hamilton, is still in existence.

Born in Hopkins County in 1911, Marshall Formby entered the legal profession early in his career. In 1936, at the age of 25, he decided to run for county judge of McAdoo, Texas. Upon his election, he became one of the youngest county judges in the state. Marshall Formby's immediate priority was to help the county return to its budget to operating on a cash rather than debt basis, which he managed to do. Four years later, he was elected to the State Senate.

After serving in World War II, Marshall Formby returned home to Texas and studied law at Baylor Law School, from which he graduated in 1951. The following year, he joined the Texas Highway Commission. At that time, West Texas did not have many interstate highways and many of the roads were muddy and ill-paved, making it difficult for commerce to be transported through these areas.

In order to expedite the construction of highways, Marshall Formby used his legal training to establish "right of way" purchase programs. These are designed to help construct highways by establishing the right of the government to purchase property which is necessary in order to facilitate construction. Marshall Formby helped codify the procedures to be used in such cases, including the appraisal of the property of value and compensation awarded to its owners. In recognition of his efforts, the Marshall Formby Memorial Highway was later established.

Marshall Formby was appointed to chairman of the Texas Highway Commission in 1957, a position which he maintained for three years until his resignation in 1959. Following the end of his service in this capacity, he made an unsuccessful run for governor of the state of Texas in 1962. In 1967, Marshall Formby joined the state's College Coordinating Board.

Throughout his life, Marshall Formby practiced law in Plainview, Texas. In this capacity, he served as an advisor to four radio stations. In addition, he was the operator of a 960 acre farm. In addition to his legal accomplishments, Marshall Formby served on a number of advisory boards, including that of Texas Tech College, the Texas Turnpike Authority and the Central Plains Region Hospital Board.

Following his death in 1984, Marshall Formby was also made the namesake of the Marshall Formby Unit in Plainview, Texas. This unit of the Texas correctional facilities was established in 1995. The Marshall Formby Unit houses low, medium and high risk inmates, as well as offering special management and rehabilitation services for prisoners with drug and alcohol dependencies. The maximum capacity of the Marshall Formby unit is 1,100 prisoners. 

Paul Cambria

One of America's most prominent criminal defense lawyers, Paul Cambria is primarily associated with his work representing members of the adult entertainment industry. When he first entered the law industry, his primary practice consisted of criminal defense. His association with Hustler publisher Larry Flynt began in 1974, when the two first met. In 1976, Paul Cambria successfully co-defended Screw magazine publisher Al Goldstein in an obscenity trial in Kansas, garnering attention for his work.

The following year, Paul Cambria represent Flynt's younger brother Jimmy during a trial concerning charges of "pandering, obscenity and organized crime." Larry was represented by another lawyer and was convicted, but Jimmy was found innocent. Impressed, their association was solidified the following year when, during a trial recess, Flynt was shot in an assassination attempt that left him paralyzed and Paul Cambria kept his wife company until Flynt stabilized. Paul Cambria has been Flynt's counsel since that period.

Another high-profile client was shock rocker Marilyn Manson, who was charged in a 1997 article published by the American Family Association of encouraging violent and sexual acts at his concerts. In response, Paul Cambria sent a cease and desist letter regarding these potentially defamatory statements.

Throughout the 2000 election, Paul Cambria endorsed and advocated the Democratic candidate, Al Gore, in part because of concerns that a Republican president would launch legal attacks on the pornography industry. In the wake of the election of George W. Bush, Paul Cambria held a meeting with adult entertainment industry figures to create guidelines for the types of images which should not be used on adult entertainment video covers. However, over time the exact recommendations of the list have become distorted with wider circulation, containing many items Paul Cambria says he did not recommend.

Michael Robert Hogan

Born in Oregon City, Oregon on September 24, 1946, Michael Robert Hogan has been a prominent judge in that state's court system for many years. After receiving a bachelor's degree from the University of Oregon in 1968, he went on to obtain his law degree from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1971. After graduation, Michael Robert Hogan spent one year as a law clerk in the US District Court's division in Oregon under Judge Robert C. Belloni. From 1972-73, he engaged in private practice in the Portland year.

In 1973, Michael Robert Hogan began his public career in the court system acting as a magistrate in the U.S. District Court where he had previously served. From 1973 to 1980, he also acted as a judge in bankruptcy court for the District of Oregon. Michael Robert Hogan's career as a magistrate came to an end in June of 1991, when President George H.W. Bush created a new district judge position in the district of Oregon. Michael Robert Hogan was nominated and served in that capacity until 2002, after which he remained remained one of the three federal judges serving in the Eugene division of the federal court system.

One of the most prominent cases overseen by Michael Robert Hogan began in 2009, when the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against the company Sunwest Management, which managed a chain of assisted living facilities. The company claimed that the global financial crisis beginning in 2007 made it impossible for Sunwest to meet its obligations to investors. The SEC wanted Sunwest's assets to be frozen, but Michael Robert Hogan declined, instead instituting a mediation process and subsequently putting the company into receivership.

Following this development, Sunwest began filing for bankruptcy for 300 separate assisted living facilities. In order to consolidate the proceedings, Michael Robert Hogan ruled that all 300 bankruptcies could be handled as a single bankruptcy case, thereby retaining control over the proceedings. By selling off its properties, Sunwest was able to pay off and recover approximately 60% of the interest and funds owed to investors.

In 2011, Michael Robert Hogan turned 65 and was classified as a "semiretired" judge with a reduced caseload while continuing his judicial duties in Oregon. In 2012, in acknowledgment of Sunwest's efforts, Michael Robert Hogan rejected another effort by the SEC to fine former Sunwest CEO Jon Harder an additional $180 million in civil penalties. In issuing this ruling, Michael Robert Hogan cited Harder's success in recovering a substantive portion of investment losses.

Aside from his work in the courtroom, Hogan is also well known for arguing since the 1990s that a new courthouse was needed for Eugene. In 2006, his efforts reached fruition when a new federal courthouse was opened in the city. Throughout this effort, Hogan collaborated extensively with the project's architect, Thom Mayn. The facilities included $1.2 million worth of public art.

Marci Hamilton

Marci Hamilton is a legal scholar specializing in questions of constitutional law who is primarily known for her expertise in the field of the separation of church and state. She received her law degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1988 and has taught at Cardozo Law School since 1990. As part of her legal training, Marci Hamilton was a legal court for Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The issues which Marci Hamilton has frequently commented on include sex abuse in the Catholic Church and in the Boy Scouts of America.

Marci Hamilton is also a regular filer of amicus curiae briefs in various trials concerning her expertise on this type of constitutional law. One of her best known cases occurred in 1997, when she served as lead counsel for the city of Boerne, Texas in the case of Boerne v. Flores. The case began when Patrick Flores, then the Catholic Archbishop of San Antonio, sought to expand the premises of St. Peter's Church in Boerne. Built in 1923, the church had seats to accommodate approximately 230 parishioners. With the growth of the congregation, the church found it was routinely unable to accommodate 40 to 60 parishioners during services.

When Archbishop Flores applied for a permit to expand the premises of the church to accommodate more parishioners, he was denied on the grounds that the church was part of a historic district. In response, Bishop Flores filed suit with the district court handling cases in the Western District of Texas. In his lawsuit, Bishop Flores argued that the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) passed by Congress protected his proposed expansion. This act was designed to provide a standard for legislation that could potentially hinder free expression of religion. Bishop Flores argued that the state of Texas was unable to demonstrate a compelling reason or interest that would justify restricting expansion of the church.

The District Court ruled in favor of the city of Boerne. As the basis for its decision, the court said that RFRA was unconstitutional. Flores then appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the lower court's ruling. The city then appealed to the Supreme Court, and Marci Hamilton was brought in to argue the city's case. Her argument was successful, and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city of Boerne. In its majority opinion, the Supreme Court noted that RFRA, as passed by Congress, was an unconstitutional attempt to define the limits of the Fourteenth Amendment, a power reserved solely for the Supreme Court.

In addition to her high-profile work on this case, Marci Hamilton has been noted for her frequent arguments that the state of Utah is derelict in not prosecuting those who contract polygamous marriages. Specifically, Marci Hamilton has argued that though polygamous marriages do not always lead to instances of child abuse, there is a strong enough correlation between the two to justify vigorous prosecution. 

Jeremy Fogel

Jeremy Fogel is the current director of the Federal Judicial Center. Prior to this appointment, Jeremy Fogel served as a municipal court judge in Santa Clara County, California, from 1981 to 1986 before being promoted to the Superior Court of Santa Clara county, a position he would maintain until his appointment to Federal District Court in 1998, a position he maintained until 2011.

During his time serving as a Federal District Court judge, Jeremy Fogel was most associated with a legal decision that effectively led to a moratorium on the execution of the death penalty in the state of California. This decision was issued in the case of Michael Morales, who was convicted in the murder of a 17-year-old woman that occurred in 1981. While Morales did not dispute that he was the killer, his defense strategy rested on the fact that he was under the influence of the hallucinogenic drug PCP, making him ineligible for "special circumstances," the burden of proof required to administer the death penalty in California.

A series of appeals failed to result in a reversal of the death penalty. In 2005, a study was published in a British medical journal stating that the three drugs used by California in lethal injection had been found to possibly lead to severe pain in the person being killed. Following the publication of this study, the two anesthesiologists who were to be present at the execution of Morales to ensure he was not in pain withdrew and refused to participate in the execution.

This case was then reviewed by Jeremy Fogel, who heard testimony both from medical professionals and victims of those who had been killed and witnessed the execution of the convicted murderers. Jeremy Fogel was also shown the execution room, which he considered so small as to be an inhumane site for the execution. Based on this evidence, Jeremy Fogel forbid the execution of Morales except through a direct injection of a single drug into his veins rather than the potentially painful three-drug combination. In his ruling, Jeremy Fogel also stipulated that this injection could only be performed by a licensed doctor, nurse or medical technician. As part of his ruling, Jeremy Fogel stated that such executions were a violation of the Sixth Amendment. The state of California was unable to obtain a medical professional willing to perform the injection and chose to let the death warrant for Morales elapse.

In response to the ruling issued by Jeremy Fogel, then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger did not appeal. Instead, he ordered the state to address the concerns raised by Jeremy Fogel in his opinion. However, the state of California has been unable to create new procedures and hire staff in order to implement a lethal injection procedure that would be in compliance with the standards set by the ruling issued by Jeremy Fogel. As a result, the state of California has not executed a prisoner since and is not expected to be able any time soon.