Comments (16) | Add a comment
Las Vegas police seize cellphones from defendants accused in courthouse scam
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Las Vegas police took the unusual step of seizing the cellphones of three defendants Wednesday after they pleaded not guilty to carrying out a scam that provided prostitutes with phony certificates of completion for court-ordered counseling and community service.
The phones were taken from defense lawyer Brian Bloomfield, 36, juvenile probation officer Robert Chiodini, 41, and former counseling service owner Steven Brox, 46.
Search warrants seeking the phones were served on all three men, who are free on bail, outside the courtroom of District Judge Jessie Walsh immediately after they had pleaded not guilty to the charges contained in a 52-count indictment against them.
The defendants face a variety of felony and gross misdemeanor charges, including forgery, conspiracy to commit a crime and offering a false instrument for filing or record. The crimes are alleged to have occurred between February 2008 and May 2010.
An affidavit supporting the search warrants, written by Detective Aaron Stanton of the Criminal Intelligence Section of the Metropolitan Police Department, is under seal. The warrants were signed by District Judge Timothy Williams.
Bloomfield, who represented the prostitutes and other defendants, is the central figure in the scam, according to the indictment and courthouse sources. He is charged in all 52 counts.
Brox's former company, United States Justice Associates, was well-known at the Regional Justice Center, especially at Las Vegas Justice Court, where its counseling services primarily were offered at the time of sentencing in mainly misdemeanor cases.
Chiodini has worked as a juvenile probation officer for Clark County since May 2001.
Bloomfield's lawyer, William Terry, could not be reached for comment.
But Brox's lawyer, Robert Draskovich, criticized the rare courthouse search.
"My concern is that the information relied upon in the search warrant is stale and that this case is becoming a full-blown witch hunt," Draskovich said.
Chiodini's attorney, Paola Armeni, added: "We're all a bit surprised because we can't imagine what cause they have at this juncture to confiscate the phones. But it will be another issue we've got to deal with in court."
Walsh set a March 14 status check in the case to decide on a trial date.
Bloomfield, the indictment and sources allege, carried out three separate schemes:
■ He had an employee complete online AIDS awareness and other counseling programs for clients through a court-approved educational service.
■ He obtained certificates of completion from Brox's company for clients, knowing the clients never fulfilled the counseling obligations.
■ He bought phony certificates for clients from Chiodini that stated the clients had completed court-ordered community service with a nonprofit organization affiliated with boxing gyms Chiodini ran.
Investigators think Bloomfield's clients never even knew about the schemes. In some cases, the certificates were filed in court. Some were presented to the prosecutors to falsely show the clients had fulfilled the sentencing requirements, investigators say. And in other cases, judges simply took Bloomfield's word that the requirements had been met, investigators say.
Justice Court officials have said there is no real vetting process for selecting counseling companies, other than that they have to be certified in their profession.
Generally, only a small group of companies offer the services, and choosing which one to use in each misdemeanor case is up to the discretion of the individual justices of the peace, officials said.
Contact reporter Jeff German at jgerman@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-8135.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
@Your.Right: The prohibition on using cell phones in the Courtroom is because they can be disruptive to the proceedings. Ringing phones and people talking into their phones make it hard for the Judge and/or jury to concentrate. An atty (or even a non-atty) texting in the back of the court will often be tolerated. It is not a sign of corruption or witness tampering or anything nefarious.
I think we can all agree the streets of Las Vegas will be a whole lot safer with these cell phones off the streets
These people are INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY!!!!!!
OH NO, not more corruption in Las Vegas Courts imagine that.Remember people get the goverment they deserve as they elected them
Will those affiliated with LV government, who are not crooked, please report to room 7.
Now, when will they confiscate the phones used by attorneys in Judge Art Ritchie's court? On film, during child abuse hearings, attorneys are texting, exiting the courtroom, going into the hallway and tampering with witnesses, returning to the courtroom, and calling the tampered witness. Art Ritchie's bailiff, Randy Jackson, is also responsible for enforcing the no cell phones in the courtroom Administrative Order signed by Chief Judge Kathy Hardcastle. However, Randy Jackson allows texting to go on right in front of him with no enforcement of the Order. Of course, the texting by attorneys in Art Ritchie's courtroom never appear on the Court Minutes.
Im really not surprised. This is just the tip of the ice berg.
Just another day in Vegas.
Jumbaco! Jumbaco!
It is amazing that our world has become sooo ignorant. If the paper wrights it, it must be true...LOL.... What happen to the State must prove them guilty and they are innocent until then. We have truly become ignorant to this. I am sure if it was anyone of us, we would want this right... Such a shame!!!!!!!!!!!!!