In Texas, a lawyer is responsible for her client until she is removed from the case by the judge. If something goes undone while the lawyer is responsible, she can be grieved and (in certain narrow circumstances) sued.So when (for example) a defendant makes bail, appointed counsel remains legally on the hook until new counsel substitutes in or the judge signs an order removing the lawyer.

Sunshine Swallers, one of the Harris County's next generation of outstanding young criminal-defense lawyers (a true believer in the best sense), is working with Suzette Sova from the Harris County Mental Health and Mental Retardation Authority (MHMRA) to arrange a 12-hour Mental Health First Aid course.The course looks like an excellent start for those of us who have to deal with mentally ill humans in our person,

Today I talked with a guy named Fred. Fred had been appointed counsel (Mr. Lawrence) in January before bonding out, and had been appointed other counsel (Ms. Morris) in April, 10 weeks after bonding out. Ms. Lawrence and Mr. Morris, along with Ms. Curley, handle virtually all of the indigent representation in the 624th District Court of Harris County, Texas, in which Fred is accused of murder.

The judge in this case had told me the other day that he generally doesn't read orders before signing them; he relies on his clerks to vet the papers and signs whatever they put before him.Judges perform powerful word magic; words on the paper make something happen in the physical world. Clerks may be as competent as judges to decide what should be ordered, but it's not

One of the common questions asked on Texas criminal lawyers’ listervs is, “does anyone have a voir dire for a … case they could share with me?” (I’m reliably informed that prosecutors do the same amongst themselves.)I have a friend—we'll call him “Bill Bomble”—who had some experience in show business before becoming a prosecutor. Bill says, “voir dire is improv,” and he's absolutely right: jury selection is

Now available: this blog, delivered wirelessly to your Kindle!

My Paladin Didn’t Charge Split Fees post stirred up some interesting discussion between criminal-defense lawyers and others in the comments.Mississippi criminal-defense lawyer Remy Orozco, who wrote the post that inspired mine, commented:This last year in private practice has brought me very few cases where my clients actually wanted to go to trial . . . . I one day hope to get my practice to the point

Everyone thinks that his way is the best. In his “How to Hire a Gun Slinger…” blog post (a staple of criminal law blawgs: the post suggesting to potential clients criteria they should look for in hiring a lawyer, and explaining how the blogger fits those criteria; I may have written that post a time or two myself), Mississippi criminal-defense lawyer Remy Orozco (Hostis Civitas) writes:

From UH Law professor David Dow:In December 2008, Mariano Rosales obtained federal habeas relief on a Batson claim.  The district court found that race had improperly influenced the prosecution's decision to strike at least three jurors.  The attorney general elected not to appeal.Rosales was convicted in connection with a tragic shooting in 1985.  Rosales' wife Mary was having an affair with Hector Balboa.  Rosales went to confront

One argument against prosecuting the waterboarders is that if the new government prosecutes the old government for its policy decisions, the Republic is doomed. The principle is sound, but its application to the question at hand – whether those who waterboarded in our name should be prosecuted – is flawed.Whether to torture is a policy decision. That policy decision has been answered in the negative many times