About Judge Heidi M. Pasichow

This comprehensive judicial complaint against D.C. Superior Court Judge Heidi M. Pasichow documents a pattern of judicial incompetence, memory problems, vindictive misconduct, and systematic violations of defendants' constitutional rights. The complaint reveals Judge Pasichow's inability to manage cases effectively, her retaliatory actions against defendants who exercise their rights, and her exploitation of appointed counsel to violate defendants' rights through what has been termed the "Amissah-Pasichow kabuki."

I. Memory Problems and Judicial Incompetence

Documented Memory Failures

Judge Pasichow has demonstrated consistent memory problems that directly impact her ability to preside over cases effectively:

  • Contradictory Orders: Judge Pasichow has issued contradictory orders and provided conflicting reasons for her decisions, indicating memory lapses and confusion
  • Forgotten Motions: Multiple motions have been filed and forgotten, requiring defendants to refile the same motions repeatedly
  • Inconsistent Rulings: Judge Pasichow has made inconsistent rulings on the same legal issues, suggesting she cannot remember her previous decisions
  • Calendar Management Issues: Repeated failures to properly manage court calendars and hearing schedules

Specific Memory Failures

In the case of Ranjith Keerikkattil (2015 CMD 017652 and 2018 CF2 010309), Judge Pasichow demonstrated multiple memory failures:

  • Forgotten Writ Requests: Despite multiple requests for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testificandum being filed on the docket, Judge Pasichow claimed she "had not received them"
  • Contradictory Hearing Cancellations: Judge Pasichow provided different reasons for cancelling the same hearing - first claiming "Court is middle of jury trial" then later stating "Defendant was unable to be transported"
  • Forgotten Sentencing Decisions: At resentencing, Judge Pasichow contradicted her own previous statements about probation, indicating she could not remember her own rulings

II. Systematic Maltreatment of Ranjith Keerikkattil

Deliberate Delays and Obstruction

Judge Pasichow engaged in systematic maltreatment of defendant Ranjith Keerikkattil through deliberate delays and obstruction of justice:

  • 23-110 Motion Delays: Judge Pasichow sat on a critical D.C. Code § 23-110 motion for over 20 months without ruling
  • Rule 33 Motion Neglect: A Rule 33 motion filed in November 2023 remained unruled for 15+ months
  • Pretrial Motion Delays: Multiple pretrial motions were ignored or delayed indefinitely
  • Failure to Issue Required Writs: Repeated refusal to issue necessary writs for defendant's appearance

Retaliatory Actions

Judge Pasichow's treatment of Keerikkattil escalated into clear retaliation:

  • Writ of Mandamus Retaliation: After Keerikkattil filed a Writ of Mandamus complaining about delays, Judge Pasichow rushed through a retaliatory sua sponte resentencing
  • Sentence Doubling: Judge Pasichow doubled Keerikkattil's sentence and added 4 years of probation in apparent retaliation
  • Case Dumping: After the retaliatory resentencing, Judge Pasichow "conveniently dumped" the 23-110 motion to Judge Salerno

III. The Amissah-Pasichow Kabuki: Systematic Rights Violations

Appointment of Incompetent Counsel

Judge Pasichow systematically appointed Albert Amissah as counsel despite clear evidence of his incompetence and inability to provide effective representation:

  • Known Incompetence: Judge Pasichow was aware of Amissah's inability to find experts, manage calendars, or provide adequate representation
  • Refusal to Replace: Despite multiple motions to substitute counsel, Judge Pasichow refused to replace Amissah with competent counsel
  • Dependent Relationship: Amissah became Judge Pasichow's "yes man" due to his dependence on her for future appointments

The Kabuki Performance

The "Amissah-Pasichow kabuki" refers to a systematic performance where:

  • Fake Competence: Judge Pasichow pretended Amissah was competent while knowing he was not
  • Rights Violations: Amissah's incompetence directly violated Keerikkattil's Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel
  • Judicial Cover: Judge Pasichow used Amissah's appointment to cover her own judicial misconduct
  • Systematic Failure: The arrangement ensured that Keerikkattil would receive ineffective assistance while appearing to have representation

Specific Failures Under Amissah

Albert Amissah's representation was marked by systematic failures:

  • Expert Witness Failure: Despite 6+ months, Amissah could not find or retain any expert witnesses
  • Calendar Mismanagement: Amissah repeatedly misrepresented his availability, causing trial delays
  • Discovery Failures: Amissah failed to review or share critical discovery materials with the defendant
  • Motion Failures: Amissah failed to adopt or supplement pro se motions filed by the defendant
  • Communication Breakdown: Amissah failed to communicate with the defendant about critical case developments

IV. Failure to Rule on Motions

Systematic Motion Neglect

Judge Pasichow has demonstrated a pattern of failing to rule on critical motions:

  • 23-110 Motion: Sat for 20+ months without ruling
  • Rule 33 Motion: Filed November 2023, still unruled 15+ months later
  • Pretrial Motions: Multiple pretrial motions ignored or delayed indefinitely
  • Counsel Substitution Motions: Repeated motions to substitute incompetent counsel ignored

Impact of Motion Neglect

The failure to rule on motions has had severe consequences:

  • Due Process Violations: Defendants denied timely resolution of their claims
  • Prejudice to Defense: Critical motions delayed until after trial, prejudicing defendants
  • Judicial Inefficiency: Cases languish in the system without resolution
  • Public Confidence: Undermines confidence in the judicial system

V. Sua Sponte Resentencing and Unlawful Actions

Unlawful Sentence Increase

Judge Pasichow's sua sponte resentencing in 2018 CF2 010309 violated established legal precedent:

  • Timing Violation: Resentencing occurred more than 5 months after original sentencing, violating the rule that sentences cannot be increased after service begins
  • No Legal Authority: Neither defense nor government requested resentencing
  • Sentence Doubling: Judge Pasichow doubled the sentence and added 4 years of probation
  • Unlawful Nunc Pro Tunc Order: Created "facts" that never occurred to justify the sentence increase

Contradictory Statements

Judge Pasichow's own statements demonstrate the unlawfulness of her actions:

Judge Pasichow's Own Words: At the initial sentencing on January 17, 2024, Judge Pasichow explicitly stated that she was "not inclined" to place the defendant on probation and "there's no reason for him to be on active probation."

VI. Retaliation for Filing Writ of Mandamus

Immediate Retaliatory Response

After Ranjith Keerikkattil filed a Writ of Mandamus complaining about Judge Pasichow's delays, she immediately engaged in retaliatory actions:

  • Rushed Resentencing: Judge Pasichow rushed through the sua sponte resentencing at "record speed"
  • Convenient Transfer: After the retaliatory resentencing, Judge Pasichow immediately transferred the 23-110 motion to Judge Salerno
  • Sentence Increase: The resentencing resulted in a doubled sentence and additional probation
  • Timing Evidence: The timing of these actions directly correlates with the filing of the Writ of Mandamus

Pattern of Retaliation

Judge Pasichow's retaliation extended beyond the resentencing:

  • Continued Motion Neglect: Despite the Writ of Mandamus, Judge Pasichow continued to neglect ruling on motions
  • Refusal to Issue Writs: Continued refusal to issue necessary writs for defendant's appearance
  • Counsel Manipulation: Continued use of incompetent counsel to violate defendant's rights

VII. Additional Judicial Misconduct

Erroneous Legal Interpretations

Judge Pasichow has repeatedly misapplied the law:

  • Supervised Release Misunderstanding: Incorrectly claimed supervised release was mandatory when it was discretionary
  • Statutory Misinterpretation: Misapplied D.C. Code provisions regarding sentencing
  • Precedent Ignorance: Ignored established legal precedent regarding sentence increases

Unprecedented and Disproportionate Sentences

Judge Pasichow has imposed sentences that are unprecedented and disproportionate:

  • BRA Sentence History: Judge Pasichow imposed perhaps the most outrageous BRA sentence on a misdemeanor in D.C. Superior Court history
  • Disproportionate Penalties: Sentences far exceed what is appropriate for the underlying offenses
  • Retaliatory Sentencing: Sentences appear designed to punish defendants for exercising their rights

VIII. Impact on Justice System

Systemic Problems

Judge Pasichow's conduct has broader implications for the justice system:

  • Due Process Violations: Systematic violations of defendants' constitutional rights
  • Judicial Inefficiency: Cases languish without resolution due to motion neglect
  • Public Confidence: Undermines public confidence in the judiciary
  • Equal Protection: Creates unequal treatment of defendants based on judicial bias

Specific Harm to Defendants

The documented misconduct has caused specific harm:

  • Extended Detention: Defendants held in pretrial detention due to judicial delays
  • Ineffective Assistance: Defendants denied effective representation through incompetent counsel appointments
  • Unlawful Sentences: Defendants subjected to unlawful and disproportionate sentences
  • Retaliatory Actions: Defendants punished for exercising their constitutional rights

IX. Legal Remedies Sought

Based on the documented judicial misconduct, the following remedies are requested:

  1. Judicial Investigation: Comprehensive investigation into Judge Pasichow's memory problems and judicial incompetence
  2. Motion Rulings: Immediate rulings on all pending motions in cases presided over by Judge Pasichow
  3. Sentence Review: Review and correction of all unlawful sentences imposed by Judge Pasichow
  4. Counsel Reassignment: Reassignment of cases with incompetent counsel to competent representation
  5. Judicial Discipline: Appropriate disciplinary action for violations of judicial ethics
  6. Case Transfer: Transfer of all pending cases from Judge Pasichow to competent judges
  7. Systemic Review: Review of the appointment system for counsel to prevent future "kabuki" arrangements

X. Conclusion

Judge Heidi M. Pasichow's conduct represents a fundamental failure of judicial responsibility and a serious threat to the integrity of the District of Columbia judicial system. Her memory problems, systematic maltreatment of defendants, exploitation of incompetent counsel, and retaliatory actions demonstrate a pattern of judicial misconduct that requires immediate intervention.

The "Amissah-Pasichow kabuki" arrangement, where Judge Pasichow systematically appointed incompetent counsel to violate defendants' rights while appearing to provide representation, represents a particularly egregious form of judicial misconduct that undermines the very foundation of the justice system.

The evidence demonstrates not only procedural violations and legal errors, but also a pattern of vindictive behavior, memory problems, and systematic rights violations that undermine public confidence in the judiciary. The unprecedented sentences imposed, systematic delays in critical proceedings, and retaliatory actions represent a serious breach of judicial ethics and professional responsibility.

"Judge Pasichow's memory problems, systematic maltreatment of defendants, and the Amissah-Pasichow kabuki arrangement demonstrate a fundamental breakdown in judicial responsibility that requires immediate investigation and disciplinary action to restore public confidence in the justice system."

Sincerely,
Ranjith Keerikkattil