Hmmm.. Why was Monica Goodling prosecuting low-level criminal cases in the fall of 2004?

<--Monica Goodling's resume. Click here to enlarge.

From TPMcafe:

Why was Monica Goodling, Department of Justice liaison to the White House, prosecuting low-level criminal cases out of the US Attorney's office in the Eastern District of Virginia (USA-EDVA) in the fall of 2004?

Was Monica Goodling padding her resume to justify an appointment as a USA or other similar position?

One person who knows the answer is the Attorney General's new Chief of Staff, Chuck Rosenberg. Rosenberg was an assistant US attorney in the USA-EDVA's office at the time. He subsequently became the USA in June 2006.

Goodling is named as the "special" assistant US attorney in a 9/28/05 appeals case. Does "special" mean that Goodling hasn't passed the bar?

Below are some details of the cases prosecuted by Monica Goodling. In two of the cases, the defendants were represented by the federal public defender's office. I don't know who represented the third defendant.

Case #1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA (Alexandria)
USA v. DoeDEFENDANT: JANE DOE AKA: Sarah Jane Gibbins; Bintu Sesay
DOCKET NUMBER: 1:04cr422
RELATED CASE NUMBERS: Other Dkt # 1:04-m-00814
FILING DATE: 10/28/2004
JUDGE: Assigned to T. S. Ellis, III
FILING TYPE: Criminal

PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY(S):Monica Goodling [COR LD NTC

]United States Attorney's Office

2100 Jamieson Ave

Alexandria, VA 22314

**NA** (703) 299-3700

DEFENDANT ATTORNEY(S):Anne Michelle Chapman [COR LD NTC pda]Office of the Federal Public Defender1650 King St Suite 500Alexandria, VA 22314(703) 600-0800
Complaint:18:1543 18:1543.F 18:1543 False Use of Passport 1:04-m-814

Case #2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA(Alexandria)
USA v. Atapaucar
DEFENDANT: HUGO ATAPAUCAR
DOCKET NUMBER: 1:04cr509
RELATED CASE NUMBERS: Other Dkt # 1:04-m-01050
FILING DATE: 12/23/2004
JUDGE: Assigned to James C. Cacheris
FILING TYPE: Criminal
PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY(S):Monica Goodling [COR LD NTC]

United States Attorney's Office

2100 Jamieson Ave

Alexandria, VA 22314

**NA** (703) 299-3700

DEFENDANT ATTORNEY(S):Suzanne Little [COR LD NTC pda]Office of the Federal Public Defender1650 King St Suite 500Alexandria, VA 22314(703) 600-0850 (703) 600-0800
Complaint: 18:1546(a) I-94 18:1546(a) Possession of Fraudulent I-94 Form 1:04-m-1050

Case #3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA(Alexandria)
USA v. Austin
DEFENDANT: RONALD AUSTIN
DOCKET NUMBER: 1:05cr54
FILING DATE: 2/3/2005
JUDGE: Assigned to Leonie M. Brinkema
FILING TYPE: Criminal
PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY(S):Monica Goodling [COR LD NTC]

United States Attorney's Office

2100 Jamieson Ave

Alexandria, VA 22314

**NA** (703) 299-3700

Case #4UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DOUGLAS D. WASHINGTON, Defendant - Apellant.
No. 04-5006
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
145 Fed. Appx. 446; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 22410
September 28, 2005, SubmittedOctober 18, 2005, Decided
NOTICE: [**1] RULES OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS MAY LIMIT CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS. PLEASE REFER TO THE RULES OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THIS CIRCUIT.
PRIOR HISTORY: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CR-04-396).
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED.
COUNSEL: Frank W. Dunham, Jr., Federal Public Defender, Michael S. Nachmanoff, Meghan S. Skelton, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant.
Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Michael J. Elston, Assistant United States Attorney, Monica M. Goodling, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
JUDGES: Before LUTTIG, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
OPINION: [*446] PER CURIAM:
Douglas D. Washington was convicted by a magistrate judge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3401 (2000), of simple assault on a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 (2000). He was sentenced to eighty days in prison followed by one year of supervised release and a $ 500 fine. Following sentencing, Washington appealed the magistrate judge's ruling denying his motion for judgment of [**2]acquittal to the district court pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 58(g)(2), and thedistrict court affirmed. On appeal, Washington contends the district court erred in assessing the evidence of force and finding it sufficient to sustain his conviction. Finding no error, we affirm.
Under Fed. R. Crim. P. 58(g), on appeal from a conviction and/or sentence imposed by a magistrate judge, the "defendant is not entitled to a trial de novoby a district judge. The scope of the appeal is the same as in an appeal to the court of appeals [*447] from a judgment entered by a sistrict judge." Fed. R.Crim. P. 58(g)(2)(D). In determining whether sufficient evidence supports a conviction, the appropriate inquiry is whether, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, any reasonable trier of fact could have found the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Glasser v. United States, 315U.S. 60, 80, 86 L. Ed. 680, 62 S. Ct. 457 (1942). In bench trials, "the judge weighs the evidence, determines the credibility of the witnesses, and finds the facts ...[and] may [**3] select among conflicting inferences to be drawn from the testimony." United States v. Bales, 813 F.2d 1289, 1293 (4th Cir. 1987). The standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence is de novo. See United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Our review of the record convinces us the district court properly assessed the evidence under a reasonable person standard, and there was sufficient evidence to support Washington's conviction. Accordingly, we affirm Washington'sconviction and sentence and the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's decision. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED