https://bennettandbennett.com/blog/unwaveringly-unwaiving Houston Criminal Defense Lawyer Sat, 29 Mar 2025 15:39:50 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.2 https://bennettandbennett.com/blog/unwaveringly-unwaiving#comment-6936 Fri, 21 May 2010 02:44:49 +0000 http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/?p=2751#comment-6936 […] Unwaveringly Unwaiving […]

]]> https://bennettandbennett.com/blog/unwaveringly-unwaiving#comment-6935 Thu, 20 May 2010 19:31:09 +0000 http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/?p=2751#comment-6935 If there was a “Like this” button a la Facebook, I would’ve clicked it.
Defending folks in federal court is already difficult enough without paving the way for the US Attorney and prosecution-minded judges to help them put your client away for as long as possible.
Everyone who’s defended two federal cases knows that “plea bargaining” doesn’t exist / is a joke. (“OK, here’s the deal. The Government will drop 65 counts of the 66 count indictment, if you plead to Count 1.” “Wow, only one Count?” “Yep. The conspiracy count.”) Sometimes, the only leverage one has is to learn as much about the case as possible so as to make an informed decision during plea negotiations about going to trial or fashioning a good response to the PSIR, and that means not waiving detention hearings, or anything else. In more cases than one would think, there is very little, if any, downside to going to trial in light of the USSG. It’s important to know, very early on, whether that reduction for “acceptance of responsibility” is going to make a difference in the long run. Often, “relevant conduct” in the PSIR is what will sink our clients.
(That’s why the AUSA offers a plea to “count 1” — the conspiracy count — so often. Guess which count allows the Probation Officer to cram the PSIR with as much “relevant conduct” as possible?)
In any event, amen, brother, to your post. Preach on.
Brad Frye
Houston

]]>