BAI LEY LA 5 Eggilzng-a?gibel?ssemom Toll Free: 877.852.0342 Fax: 304.342.1110 September 7, 2018 Lee Cassis Senate Clerk Room 211M, Bldg. 1 State Capitol Complex Charleston, WV 25305 Re: In re Matter of Impeachment Proceedings Against Respondent Chief Justice Margaret Workman Dear Clerk Cassis: Please ?nd enclosed, for ?ling in the above referenced matter, Respondent?s Motion to Set Trial Date and Brie?ng Schedule. A copy has been provided to all parties as indicated on the Certi?cate of Service. 87mm Benjamin L. 3 Should you have any questions please contact me. Enclosure cc: Honorable Paul T. Farrell Honorable Roger Hanshaw Honorable Ray Hollen Honorable John Shott Honorable Rodney Miller Honorable Andrew Chief Justice Workman baileyglasser.com IN THE WEST VIRGINIA SENATE IN THE MA ER 0F IMPEA CHMENT PROCEEDINGS A GAINS RESPONDENT CHIEF JUSTICE MARGARET WORKMAN Honorable Paul T. Farrell Acting Justice of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia Presiding Of?cer MOTION TO SET TRIAL DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE Respondent Chief Justice Margaret Workman, by counsel, respectfully moves the Presiding Of?cer to set a date no earlier than Monday, October 15, 2018, for the commencement of her trial in the Senate, and to set an appropriate brie?ng schedule for motions. In support of this motion, Respondent states as follows: 1. The Articles of Impeachment, and particularly Article XIV, allege a broad range of misconduct at the Supreme Court of Appeals, from remodeling to lunches to picture framing to the content of the justices? tax submissions. Because the trial will concern subjects so numerous and varied, an enormous amount of evidence must be obtained and reviewed not only by the defense, but also by the Board of Managers. Respondent has identi?ed more than sixty possible witnesses, and today will produce in excess of 35,000 pages of documents that could be used at trial. On information and belief, there are thousands more potentially relevant documents yet to be obtained and evaluated for production. 2. In addition, there is considerable motion practice that must be conducted prior to any trial. Respondent anticipates ?ling no fewer than a dozen discretely targeted motions to dismiss the charges. The Board of Managers will require time to respond substantively to each such motion. Respondent will also move for a bill of particulars seeking additional information with particular respect to Article XIV, which does not specify which justices caused which instances of alleged misconduct, or what those justices did to cause them. If Respondent?s motion for a bill of particulars is granted, then she must be afforded the opportunity to ?le additional dismissal motions premised on the details thereby disclosed. Respondent will also ?le motions in limine to exclude irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial evidence from the Senate?s consideration, each of which will require a response from the Board of Managers. 3. In a criminal case of comparable complexity, the parties would generally be afforded at least six months to digest the legal and factual issues in order to ready themselves for trial. In a comparable civil matter, the parties would expect to have no less than one year to prepare their presentations, and frequently much longer. The Articles of Impeachment were adopted on August 13, 2018, and Respondent recognizes the exigencies that the Senate consequently confronts in attempting to conduct as many as four impeachment trials prior to the expiration of the 83rd Legislature. For that reason, Respondent?s counsel is making its best efforts to compress within a two-month period the preparation of a robust defense that, under normal circumstances, would take at least two to three times that long. The necessary timeframe cannot be further condensed without running afoul of fundamental requirements of due process. 4. A reasonable trial date no earlier than October 15, 2018, would also permit the imposition of an orderly brie?ng schedule. Respondent moves for the following schedule: September 10, 2018 Respondent?s motion for bill of particulars; September 13, 2018 Board of Managers? response to motion for bill of particulars; September 14, 2018 Respondent?s reply in support of motion for bill of particulars; September 17, 2018 Presiding Judge?s ruling on motion for bill of particulars; September 17, 2018 or four (4) weeks prior to trial Motions to dismiss not premised on bill of particulars; September 20, 2018 Bill of particulars to be furnished, if motion granted; September 24, 2018 or three (3) weeks prior to trial Motions to dismiss premised on bill of particulars; September 24, 2018 or three (3) weeks prior to trial Motions in limine; October 1, 2018 or two (2) weeks prior to trial Oppositions to dismissal motions and motions in limine; October 8, 2018 or one (1) week prior to trial Replies in support of dismissal motions and motions in limine. WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that the Presiding Of?cer: grant this motion; (ii) set a trial date no earlier than Monday, October 15, 2018; and establish a brie?ng schedule in substantial conformance with the foregoing. By Counsel: Ben' in L. Bailey (WVSB #289 bb?ll =?baileyglassencom Steven R. Ruby (WVSB #10752) srubyr??tbailevglassemom Raymond S. Franks II (WVSB #6523) rfrai?