Warrant for Lambert Junttila remains as she misses another hearing in tabulator tampering case • Michigan Advance – Michigan Advance
Former state Rep. Daire Rendon (R-Lake City) appears via Zoom for Oakland County Circuit Court hearing – 3-13-24
Attorney Stefanie Lambert Junttila once again failed to appear for a court hearing Wednesday, with Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Jeffery S. Matis rejecting a request to dismiss a bench warrant for her arrest.
Matis issued the warrant for Lambert Junttila on Friday after she did not appear at a March 7 show cause hearing and did not turn herself in within 24 hours as directed by the court.
Lambert Junttila is one of three individuals indicted as part of a probe into alleged tampering with voting tabulators following the 2020 election where President Joe Biden defeated former President Donald Trump. Attorney and former Republican attorney general nominee Matthew DePerno and former state Rep. Daire Rendon (R-Lake City) were also indicted.
The court had issued multiple orders for Lambert Junttila to have her fingerprints and a DNA sample taken, as is required by law. Matis previously noted the initial deadline requesting fingerprints and DNA sampling was set for Aug. 10, 2023. At Wednesday’s hearing, he also noted that he had given Lambert Junttila every opportunity to fulfill the court’s orders.
“[The March 7] hearing was set at 3 o’clock; the court waited, spoke with counsel who was present, Mr. [Michael J.] Smith, as well as the prosecutor, and I indicated that I would wait for her to arrive,” said Matis. “So we waited some hour or so and I think it was after four o’clock, ultimately when it was, the court was advised by defense counsel Mr. Smith, that she was not coming, that the matter then was called, proceeded and the prosecution made a request for a bench warrant, which the court granted. So the case is presently in a bench warrant status right now.”
Appearing on behalf of Lambert Juntilla was Attorney Dan Hartman, who most recently served as the counsel for the Michigan Republican Party when Kristina Karamo was its chair.
Hartman said he has been retained due to a “breakdown in the attorney-client relationship” between Lambert Juntilla and her previous attorney, Smith. Smith had sought to subpoena Attorney General Dana Nessel and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who are both Democrats, to appear and testify at Lambert Junttila’s trial, with legal counsel for both officials filing a motion to quash the subpoena.
Hartman asked the court for more time to respond to that motion, and that the bench warrant against Lambert Junttila be rescinded.
“I’m significantly disadvantaged. I have been briefed on what I believe the issues are for my client and I’m prepared to go forward,” said Hartman. “It’s better than my client proceeding pro se [without counsel], but I would respectfully request the court to schedule a quick hearing on my motion to withdraw the bench warrant to set it for a new show cause hearing.”
Hartman said he could present evidence that Lambert Junttila was confused about the date and time of last week’s hearing due to the miscommunication with Smith.
“We can present evidence that her non-appearance was not a willful disregard of the court order and that she was in fact confused and by the time the communication came to her it was too late to remedy and cure that.”
Prosecutor Tim Maat was adamant that the warrant remain in place, noting that Lambert Junttila was well aware of the March 7 hearing, and that her failure to appear was not for any justifiable reason.
“The court has made the appropriate rulings and for them to ask that you revisit it, I don’t think is properly before this court,” he said. “It would certainly be relitigation of an issue that has been well litigated and decided by the court on Thursday. We oppose the request in total.”
Maat also noted that Lambert Junttila was again not present, prompting Judge Matis to ask his clerk if anyone was in the Zoom waiting room. When told there was no one, he himself asked if she were present in the court, to which no one answered. Satisfied that Lambert Junttila was not there, Matis ruled that the warrant would remain in effect.
“She needs to turn herself in or she will be picked up,” he said.
However, Matis did grant Hartman’s request for additional time to file a response to the motion to quash the subpoenas, giving him until March 25 to file. A hearing would then likely be held on March 27 to decide the issue, although he said the April 1 trial date was likely to be adjourned as a result.
Earlier in the hearing, Matis denied a motion by Rendon to dismiss one of the charges against her.
“I do believe the statute gives a person of ordinary intelligence reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited or required,” he said in reference to defense arguments that the law was vague as to what constitutes “undue possession” of a voting machine.
Matis also agreed to remand Rendon’s case back to district court for a preliminary exam, which had previously been requested by Special Prosecutor D.J. Hilson. DePerno’s attorney had also previously agreed to that stipulation. Lambert Junttila was the only one of the three defendants who requested to go directly to trial.
Court documents filed by Hilson allege that in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Lambert Junttila and DePerno were “frequently” present in Oakland County hotel rooms and residences where individuals performed “testing” and/or experiments on voting machines.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
by Jon King, Michigan Advance
March 13, 2024
by Jon King, Michigan Advance
March 13, 2024
Attorney Stefanie Lambert Junttila once again failed to appear for a court hearing Wednesday, with Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Jeffery S. Matis rejecting a request to dismiss a bench warrant for her arrest.
Matis issued the warrant for Lambert Junttila on Friday after she did not appear at a March 7 show cause hearing and did not turn herself in within 24 hours as directed by the court.
Lambert Junttila is one of three individuals indicted as part of a probe into alleged tampering with voting tabulators following the 2020 election where President Joe Biden defeated former President Donald Trump. Attorney and former Republican attorney general nominee Matthew DePerno and former state Rep. Daire Rendon (R-Lake City) were also indicted.
The court had issued multiple orders for Lambert Junttila to have her fingerprints and a DNA sample taken, as is required by law. Matis previously noted the initial deadline requesting fingerprints and DNA sampling was set for Aug. 10, 2023. At Wednesday’s hearing, he also noted that he had given Lambert Junttila every opportunity to fulfill the court’s orders.
“[The March 7] hearing was set at 3 o’clock; the court waited, spoke with counsel who was present, Mr. [Michael J.] Smith, as well as the prosecutor, and I indicated that I would wait for her to arrive,” said Matis. “So we waited some hour or so and I think it was after four o’clock, ultimately when it was, the court was advised by defense counsel Mr. Smith, that she was not coming, that the matter then was called, proceeded and the prosecution made a request for a bench warrant, which the court granted. So the case is presently in a bench warrant status right now.”
Appearing on behalf of Lambert Juntilla was Attorney Dan Hartman, who most recently served as the counsel for the Michigan Republican Party when Kristina Karamo was its chair.
Hartman said he has been retained due to a “breakdown in the attorney-client relationship” between Lambert Juntilla and her previous attorney, Smith. Smith had sought to subpoena Attorney General Dana Nessel and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who are both Democrats, to appear and testify at Lambert Junttila’s trial, with legal counsel for both officials filing a motion to quash the subpoena.
Hartman asked the court for more time to respond to that motion, and that the bench warrant against Lambert Junttila be rescinded.
“I’m significantly disadvantaged. I have been briefed on what I believe the issues are for my client and I’m prepared to go forward,” said Hartman. “It’s better than my client proceeding pro se [without counsel], but I would respectfully request the court to schedule a quick hearing on my motion to withdraw the bench warrant to set it for a new show cause hearing.”
Hartman said he could present evidence that Lambert Junttila was confused about the date and time of last week’s hearing due to the miscommunication with Smith.
“We can present evidence that her non-appearance was not a willful disregard of the court order and that she was in fact confused and by the time the communication came to her it was too late to remedy and cure that.”
Prosecutor Tim Maat was adamant that the warrant remain in place, noting that Lambert Junttila was well aware of the March 7 hearing, and that her failure to appear was not for any justifiable reason.
“The court has made the appropriate rulings and for them to ask that you revisit it, I don’t think is properly before this court,” he said. “It would certainly be relitigation of an issue that has been well litigated and decided by the court on Thursday. We oppose the request in total.”
Maat also noted that Lambert Junttila was again not present, prompting Judge Matis to ask his clerk if anyone was in the Zoom waiting room. When told there was no one, he himself asked if she were present in the court, to which no one answered. Satisfied that Lambert Junttila was not there, Matis ruled that the warrant would remain in effect.
“She needs to turn herself in or she will be picked up,” he said.
However, Matis did grant Hartman’s request for additional time to file a response to the motion to quash the subpoenas, giving him until March 25 to file. A hearing would then likely be held on March 27 to decide the issue, although he said the April 1 trial date was likely to be adjourned as a result.
Earlier in the hearing, Matis denied a motion by Rendon to dismiss one of the charges against her.
“I do believe the statute gives a person of ordinary intelligence reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited or required,” he said in reference to defense arguments that the law was vague as to what constitutes “undue possession” of a voting machine.
Matis also agreed to remand Rendon’s case back to district court for a preliminary exam, which had previously been requested by Special Prosecutor D.J. Hilson. DePerno’s attorney had also previously agreed to that stipulation. Lambert Junttila was the only one of the three defendants who requested to go directly to trial.
Court documents filed by Hilson allege that in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Lambert Junttila and DePerno were “frequently” present in Oakland County hotel rooms and residences where individuals performed “testing” and/or experiments on voting machines.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan J. Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on Facebook and Twitter.
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. AP and Getty images may not be republished. Please see our republishing guidelines for use of any other photos and graphics.
Jon King is the Senior Reporter for the Michigan Advance and has been a journalist for more than 35 years. He is the Past President of the Michigan Associated Press Media Editors Association and has been recognized for excellence numerous times, most recently in 2022 with the Best Investigative Story by the Michigan Association of Broadcasters. He is also an adjunct faculty member at Cleary University. Jon and his family live in Howell.
DEMOCRACY TOOLKIT
© Michigan Advance, 2024
Corporate media aren’t cutting it. The Michigan Advance is a nonprofit outlet featuring hard-hitting reporting on politics and policy and the best progressive commentary in the state.
We’re part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our website.