Judge Hannah Dugan trial: Evidence released, courtroom audio records conversations about ICE agents and undocumented immigrant
MILWAUKEE (CBS 58) -- Judge Hannah Dugan's defense team is now asking the judge in her federal case to hold a new trial.
It comes as we're seeing and hearing, for the first time, the evidence that was presented at the trial.
On Dec. 18, a jury found Dugan guilty of a felony count of obstructing federal officers who were trying to make an arrest. But she was found not guilty of a similar, but lesser, charge.
Dugan's attorneys argue you cannot have one without the other. Immediately after the verdict was announced last week, the attorneys vowed to appeal.
They want the judge to throw out the jury's guilty verdict and hold a new trial.
In the meantime, we secured the entire catalog of evidence the jurors saw and heard that informed their deliberations. It constitutes 125 pieces of evidence that were painstakingly shown and reshown to jurors during witness testimony.
Chronologically, it tells the story of what happened inside Judge Hannah Dugan's courtroom and in the hallway outside it on April 18.
Courtroom audio captured Judge Dugan preparing to call her first case of the morning.
Judge Hannah Dugan: "So we'll call that case."
Clerk Alan Freed: "Judge, we have five ICE guys in the hall."
Dugan: "Five what?"
Freed: "Five ICE guys in the hallway. ICE."
Dugan: "Oh."
Freed said he'd call the chief judge, but Dugan stopped him.
She collected Judge Kristela Cervera from her neighboring courtroom, then went to the hallway.
Dugan interacted with agents for just over a minute. When she returned to her courtroom, Dugan told the attorney she had originally called to step back as she called a different attorney.
Judge Hannah Dugan: "What's the name of client?"
Mercedes de la Rosa, attorney for Eduardo Flores Ruiz: "Eduardo Flores. Flores Ruiz."
Dugan: "Do we need an interpreter for this case?"
Clerk Alan Freed: "Yes."
Dugan: "What are you asking for?"
De la Rosa: "Just another date. For status."
Dugan: "Get a date off the record. Right now."
And a short time later, she said:
Judge Hannah Dugan: "Ms. De la Rosa, get your client out and come back and get a date, ok?"
As Flores Ruiz' attorney got another hearing date, with him still in the courtroom, Dugan and her court reporter whispered to each other.
Judge Hannah Dugan: "Down the stairs."
Court reporter Joan Butz: "This one? Oh, down the stairs. Oh, yeah, yeah. Want me to show them or does she know?"
Outside the jury door in Dugan's courtroom is a private hallway. It leads back to the public hallway where the federal agents were seen. But there is also a door to a stairway that leads down to the fifth floor.
Court reporter Joan Butz: "Want me to show them? She might go out..."
Judge Hannah Dugan: "I'll do it. I'll take the heat."
Butz: "I'd rather get in trouble."
There is no timetable for when Judge Lynn Adelman could decide the issue.
The evidence also included several email conversations between judges about immigration activity.
On April 3, two weeks before the incident with federal agents, Chief Judge Carl Ashley wrote to the judges:
"Colleagues,
Please be aware that ICE has taken at least two people into custody in the Courthouse and Safety Building Public hallways. The first incident occurred on March 20 in the Courthouse after an injunction hearing ended where the respondent was detained and the second occurred today in the Safety Building before the defendant’s hearing; both in public hallways. If these detentions occurred in the courtroom, I believe it would have directly interfered with our judicial process. I’m not sure if we have the authority to intervene in what happens in a public hallway. I have reached out to Corporation Counsel and the Director’s Office for their input. Please let me know if you’re aware of other ICE activity in the Courthouse complex.
Thanks,
CJA"
Judge Laura Perez responded the next day. A few days before, she had attended a virtual training session hosted by the National Judicial Network.
Perez wrote:
"Two quick takeaways: 1. ICE can legally conduct enforcement (ie, take people into custody) in public areas of the courthouse. 2. There are statutory and policy limitations to such enforcement, including a federal law prohibition against conducting enforcement in courthouses against victims appearing in cases involving a protective order, child custody, or cases related to DV, sex assault, trafficking, stalking, and certain other crimes.
It sounds like the detentions described by the Chief fall within the law and policies. However I would strongly advise that we develop a court-wide policy governing ICE actions in both of our courthouses, including requiring that ICE agents check in with the Chief Judge before conducting any enforcement. Such a requirement is consistent with current federal ICE policy, which requires ICE actions in courthouses to be taken collaboratively with court staff. (That policy was enacted on January 21, 2025, i.e. by the current administration.)"
On April 8, Judge Nidhi Kashyap wrote:
"Thank you for the information Laura. While arrests by state law enforcement agencies may be routine at the courthouse, immigration enforcement at courthouses is hardly routine and it is worthy of our attention. I am glad that the Chief Judge Ashley is looking into this matter."
Judge Katie Kegel, who testified during the trial, wrote:
"People have been snatched up out of my gallery while waiting for their hearing. Adding this to the conversation because I wonder if a standing policy regarding any detentions of any sort from inside the courtroom is worthy of discussion. It is separate, but related to, ICE arresting folks in the hallway."
In a separate email chain started April 6, Ashley wrote the two previous arrests had a "Chilling Effect on Access to Justice," and caused an "Erosion of Trust in the Judicial System" and "Confusion over Legal Protections".
It started an email chain about putting policies in place at the courthouse for when federal agents were there to make an arrest.
On April 8, Dugan emailed the group of judges, "I have seen in my court more people not showing up for court dates."
She wrote, "Optimally, it would be great to have at least a draft of written protocols." She later added, "We are in some uncharted waters."
The defense used that email to say Dugan wanted to have a policy in place to follow.
The next day, Ashley sent out a draft policy, then held a Zoom meeting for judges to discuss.
On April 10, he sent a revised draft of the policy based on input from the meeting that was sent to system partners like courthouse security and local law enforcement. During the trial, Ashley testified the draft policy was not official.
The evidence also included an email chain that circulated after Dugan's interaction with officers April 18.
That afternoon, Ashley informed the judges of the incident, writing:
"Colleagues,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents came into the Courthouse Complex this morning, April 18, 2025. They identified themselves when they came through security. They went to the Historic Courthouse on the sixth floor. They were asked whether they had a warrant and the agent presented the warrant as well as their identification. They were asked to go to the Chief Judge’s office. They complied. DCA Garbo and I spoke to the agents. They presented a warrant which we copied. They were asked to wait until the court hearing ended. All of the agent’s actions were consistent with our draft polices, but we’re still in the process of conferring on the draft.
CJA"
Judge Marisabel Cabrera responded:
"When you say warrant, do you mean a judicial warrant?
~Judge Cabrera"
Dugan responded to the group:
"Good morning,
As a point of clarification below, a warrant was not presented in the hallway on the 6th floor.
Best,
Hannah Dugan"