713-224-1747
Recent Blog Posts
Covering Your Ass
There's an interesting discussion going on over at Gideon's A Public Defender about lawyers covering their asses (an effete small-town judge once threatened to report me to the bar for using that expression in a letter to former counsel) by explaining to the public or the court that their clients had considered and turned down a plea offer.
New York criminal-defense lawyer Scott Greenfield argues (quite correctly) that a lawyer should not place his own interests above his clients and announce that the client, in turning down a plea agreement, "is being very foolish in my view. He was given a plea bargain that's not a lenient plea bargain, but under the circumstance, if he goes to trial, he will get a lot more,"
Gideon replies:
Scott, I completely agree with you, but what about this limited statement on the record:"I have discussed with my client the state's offer and the pros and cons of accepting it and it is his decision to reject the offer at this time".
Made With Mac
Austin criminal-defense lawyer Jamie Spencer just bought himself a MacBook Pro. As it turns out (see the comments to Jamie's post), Ft. Worth criminal-defense lawyer Shawn Matlock is a Mac guy as well.
I've been using Macintosh computers since college; I haven't had a PC since before Windows first came out. Criminal defense is a creative profession, and a Macs, which just work, are excellent tools for creative professionals. Now that most Windows software will run in Parallels on an Intel Mac (and Windows "boots" in the background in about 15 seconds), there's little reason for most of us to buy a PC.
I just found a better solution to a Mac hardware puzzle that I've been trying to solve for years (since OS 9 stopped supporting my SCSI scanner with automatic document feeder): how to turn paper into PDFs. I had been using a Xerox Workcentre multifunction machine that scan-to-PDF and email the results to me, but that was cumbersome and slow. Last week I upgraded to a Fujitsu Scansnap S500M (made for Mac).
The Detention Hearing in Federal Court
When a person is arrested on federal charges, often the government wants him detained (held without bail) while the case is pending. The government will file a motion for detention, and a magistrate judge will hear evidence to determine whether the accused should be detained or released on conditions.
The issue in a detention hearing is whether there is any combination of conditions of release that will ensure that the accused will appear in court and not harm the community. In federal drug conspiracy cases, there is almost always a presumption of detention. When the magistrate finds that there is probable cause to believe the accused committed a federal drug crime with a possible sentence of ten years or more, it is presumed that no combination of conditions of release will ensure his appearance and the safety of the community.
An indictment is enough to show that there is probable cause. So a person indicted for a federal drug conspiracy is at a disadvantage from the beginning of a detention hearing.
Sometimes You Have to Bask
Check out these comments to Norm Pattis's Justice Demands Defense column in today's Hartford Courant. People from all over the country lay into Norm's ideas, Norm, and criminal-defense lawyers generally.
There's ignorance there ("Defense lawyers would rather be disbarred before ever allowing a guilty plea."), suspicion ("This is how defense lawyers think, if they know their client is guilty and a threat to society, they still use trickery to get them acquitted and then refuse to take responsibility for their later crimes."), anger ("For the attorneys who think they have rights, stop soaking people of their hard earned money and get a real job!"), and fear ("Personally, I don't think there really is a safe place to live anymore, not after 11 SEP 01.").
Fox Requests Comment on New Henhouse-Guarding Standards
Via David Feige's Indefensible, the LA Times reports that
death penalty advocates Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Gold River) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) led a successful effort to include language in the Patriot Act last year that let the attorney general, rather than [federal] judges, decide whether states were ensuring death row inmates had adequate legal representation [in postconviction proceedings].
DOJ is seeking comment (yeah, right) on the proposed rule.
David (whom I envision reading the Times as he lounges on the beach in former-PD Paradise) points out that our current AG has "shown himself at best incompetent and at worst a perjurer." Fair enough.
But never mind Alberto Gonzales (he's not long for office anyway). If you care at all about the appearance of fairness in the system, you don't let a prosecutor decide whether states are ensuring adequate representation in death penalty cases.
Name that Sign!
This is the complaining witness is one of my cases. I understand that the gesture he is making indicates membership in some affinity organization... some sort of club for urban youth:
If you know of an expert who could mores specifically identify the organization based on the gesture, please let me know.
Thanks.
Could We Be Wrong?
From the Detroit Free Press, via crimprof:
Is it true? Probably not - in April 2007 Drug Czar John Walters (the source for the Free Press's information) reported in a letter to Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa that retail cocaine prices had fallen 11 percent from February 2005 to October 2006, to about $135 per gram of pure cocaine - hovering near the same levels since the early 1990s. In November 2005, however, Walters had claimed that cocaine prices had risen 19 percent and purity had dropped by about the same. The ONDCP noisily takes credit when drug prices increase, and quietly makes excuses when they decrease.
If there is a shortage of cocaine in Detroit and other U.S. cities, it is probably not because of law enforcement efforts. My take: the internecine drug war that spread from Nuevo Laredo to Monterrey has done more to curb the supply of cocaine (and therefore of defendants charged with drug trafficking) to Houston (and to the areas served by Houston as a hub of narcotics distribution) than anything the government has done in the last 30 years.
What Would You Do If... ?
Bryan, Texas criminal-defense lawyer Stephen Gustitis wrote last week about The Seeds we Sow, pointing out that "we lawyers have it pretty good."
Indeed. This is something I think about often. Consider...
What would you do if you went out to start your car tomorrow, and your car wouldn't start? How would you get to work? What if you needed $1,000 to fix the car? Where would you get it?
On our way home from a date the other night, Jennifer and I stopped to help a lady whose car was breaking down. My guess, from the noises the engine was making and the clouds of steam coming out of the tailpipe, was that the head gasket had failed. Jen provided cover while I got out and pushed the lady's car into a gas station parking lot. Then we gave her and her young son a ride home. She told us that she and her husband had just bought the car three days before, and she was hoping that the used car dealer that sold it to them would fix it. The car was the family's only form of transportation, and they were living from paycheck to paycheck and didn't have the money saved for expensive repairs.
Six Witness Rules
Via Beaumont, Texas criminal-defense lawyer Ryan Matuska (one of my former UHLC trial ad students now fighting the good fight), the Six Big Witness Rules:
#1 TELL THE TRUTH – ALWAYS!
NEVER GUESS. IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, JUST SAY SO. SAY "I DON'T KNOW" OR "I DON'T REMEMBER." ABSOLUTELY DO NOT GUESS OR MAKE UP DETAILS THAT YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT. ONLY SAY WHAT YOU KNOW. EVEN IF IT SEEMS LIKE A SMALL DETAIL, DON'T GUESS.
#2 LISTEN TO THE QUESTION ASKED
IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION, MISSED PART OF IT, FORGOT IT, OR DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT, PAUSE. ASK THE LAWYER TO REPEAT THE QUESTION OR LET HER KNOW YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT. CHANCES ARE THE JURY OR JUDGE DIDN'T EITHER.
#3 ANSWER THE QUESTION ASKED AND THEN STOP. DON'T RAMBLE ON ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. THIS ONLY CREATES MORE QUESTIONS. ANSWER WHAT WAS ASKED AND STOP THERE.
SOME QUESTIONS SEEM UNFAIR BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO NARROW. RELAX. JUST ANSWER WHAT WAS ASKED, NO MORE. REMEMBER THERE ARE TWO ATTORNEYS. AS YOUR ATTORNEY, I WILL EXPAND THE ANSWERS DURING MY QUESTIONING. DON'T FEEL OBLIGATED TO EXPLAIN A NARROW ANSWER. LET THE ATTORNEYS DO THAT.
The Question, Revisited
Thanks to Gideon of A Public Defender for this quote from New Haven public defender Tom Ullman:
It would be a terrible message if I didn't take this case. There was never any hesitation in my mind about taking it. As a lawyer, I would always rather be on the side that's advocating for someone's life rather than planning, plotting, strategizing and intending to kill someone.
Sometimes all you can say is "amen."
Contact Us if You're
Ready for a Better Future
Schedule a consultation today by filling out the form below or calling our office at 713-224-1747. We look forward to representing you.
The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.
I have read and understand the Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.
From our office in Houston, we represent clients throughout Harris County and across the state of Texas. We assist with criminal cases in Conroe, The Woodlands, Kingwood, Bellaire, Friendswood, Highland Village, West University Place, Cypress, Willis, Austin, Dallas, For Worth, Arlington, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, Beaumont, Tyler, Plano, Spring, New Caney, Porter, Humble, Atascocita, Aldine, Cloverleaf, Pasadena, South Houston, Pearland, Fresno, Missouri City, Sugar Land, Pecan Grove, Richmond, and Katy.
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
917 Franklin Street, Fourth Floor, Houston, TX 77002
713-224-1747
