713-224-1747
Recent Blog Posts
Travis's Letter from the Alamo
Send this to San Felipe by Express night & day To The People of Texas and All AmericansCommandancy of the Alamo-Bejar, Fby. 24th 1836- To the People of Texas & all Americans in the world- Fellow citizens & compatriots-I am besieged, by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna-I have sustained a continual Bombardment & cannonade for 24 hours & have not lost a man-The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword, if the fort is taken-I have answered the demand with a cannon shot, & our flag still waves proudly from the walls-I shall never surrender or retreatThen, I call on you in the name of Liberty, of patriotism & every thing dear to the American character, to come to our aid,with all dispatch-The enemy is receiving reinforcements daily & will no doubt increase to three or four thousand in four or five days.If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible & die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor & that of his country-Victory or DeathWilliam Barret TravisLt. Col. comdt P.S. The Lord is on our side-When the enemy appeared in sight we had not three bushels of corn-We have since found in deserted houses 80 or 90 bushels & got into the walls 20 or 30 head of Beeves-Travis
NM: TSA to Oversee Prom Searches
What do you do if you're a U.S. District Court judge who's concerned that the people handling security at a high-school prom might molest high-school students?
You order a "TSA certified person" to supervise, of course.
Because TSA-certified people would never grope high-school students?
Because TSA-certified people pat people down only when there are reasonable grounds?
Or because our kids should get used to being molested the US Government way?
Future's Hope
The other J-Dog, at Restoring Dignity to the Law, opines that Joseph Rakofsky is also a symptom of one of the fundamental problems of attorney oversupply and writes:
I'm ultimately your ally, Joseph, because you're a victim, just like most of our generation of law graduates. To make it into and through law school, you obviously have higher than average intelligence. And it's clear that you have an entrepreneurial spirit. You apparently made a series of major mistakes, but honestly, I don't think it's your fault. You entered a system that, sadly, is rigged against people like you and me. You were given an accredited education and a law license and told to "go get 'em." You did that, and now you're being punished because you decided to hang a shingle and do what it was you thought you were trained to do. I think you were foolish, absolutely, but the ultimate blame, I think, goes directly to the system that produced you (and, it appears, your current attorney).
Who Doesn't Want Broader Jury Pools?
When courts summon everyone who meets the minimum requirements for sitting on a jury – that they are county residents at least 18 years old and not convicted felons – there's a potential of "diluting" jury pools, said Athens attorney Harry Gordon, who served as district attorney for Clarke and Oconee counties for nearly three decades."There's a possibility (the new law) could open up jury service to every Tom, Dick and Harry, and that could diminish the validity of the jury system," Gordon said. "If it liberalizes people that get on juries, it's possible you could find more undesirable jurors, but it's going to have to be tried because it's the law, and we'll just have to wait and see if it works more efficiently or not."
Online Athens, via Gideon at A Public Defender. Gideon writes:
Every Tom, Dick and Harry, aka law-abiding citizens who have every right to participate in the legal system. Or, to prosecutors, real peers of the defendant who have experienced the same bullshit tactics that police employ, who live in the neighborhoods and communities where crimes are committed, who may be better at holding the State to its high standard and who aren't as predisposed to convict. It's well known that if we had a truly representative cross-section of the community sitting on juries, there'd be fewer convictions, not because "every Tom, Dick & Harry" is more likely to ignore the law, but because they'd be more likely to understand that not everything is black and white[.]
Nothing for Nothing
On Monday, I was hired by a man's father to represent the man on a serious felony case.
When I say, "I was hired" here I mean that the father and I agreed on a fee for my representation, and the man approved my representation. We had, in other words, a contract.
It was not a written contract, but this is Texas, where we do business on our word (see, e.g., Pennzoil v. Texaco), and I had no reason to think that the father wouldn't comply, so I went to court for the man. I spoke with the prosecutor about the case, arranged for a bail hearing, and drafted and filed a writ of habeas corpus.
Tuesday morning-I'm sure my fellow CDLs saw this coming-the father called me and told me that his local law firm had recommended a Houston firm, and they would be going with that firm. Tuesday night, the father sent me this email:
Let me again thank you for your help on such short notice.... We have been able to engage a lawyer from [website] through our long term local law firm. He will be with [my son] for his court date on [date]. In closing, I wanted to comment on your slogan, "Just Lawyers Helping People"; it is very nice (and unusual) in today's world to find someone who does walk the walk.
Indiana Cops Get the Keys to the Castle
In a great and rare example of real judicial activism, the Indiana Supreme Court has, without even being asked, outlawed something that hundreds of years of common law have allowed and the Indiana Legislature has explicitly authorized.
And the law of England has so particular and tender a regard to the immunity of a man's house, that it stiles it his castle, and will never suffer it to be violated with immunity: agreeing herein with the sentiments of ancient Rome, as expressed in the works of Tully; "quid enim sanctius, quid omni religione munitius, quam domus unusquisque civium?" [What more sacred, what more strongly guarded by every holy feeling, than a man's own home?]
Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-69).
The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!
Richard Borzouye: No Bad Publicity?
There is a class of lawyer that thinks that there is no bad publicity; that anything that gets their name in the news, regardless of how undistinguished, is worth doing and bragging about. I know one lawyer here in Houston who will take a newsworthy case for a small downpayment, pump the case for publicity, hold press conferences that harm the client's interests, and then, when the news cycle has passed it by and the client can't pay her balance, dump the client.
The theory, I think, is that the booboisie thinks that only good lawyers get their name in the news, so that the audience associates "high-profile" with "good." And the theory might be an accurate one, especially in the more vacuous parts of the country. I recently had a conversation with an LA Times reporter who wanted the scoop on another Houston criminal-defense lawyer; she thought he must not be a very good lawyer because he didn't have many high-profile cases. The truth, which I tried to explain to her, is that keeping his clients' names out of the paper is a major part of the job for a criminal-defense lawyer who is looking out for his clients. Often the appearance of the lawyer's name in the paper or face on the news means that the lawyer has already failed. (If you come upon a lawyer who calls himself "high-profile" or says he specializes in high-profile cases, don't walk away. Run.)
Compendium of Rakofsky (and Borzouye) v. Internet Blog Posts
For your enlightenment and amusement:
(More as I find them, or in the pingbacks.)
The Rakofsky v. Internet Lawsuit(s)
Rakofsky had a problem.
He'd gotten into a bad situation.
A newspaper had written about it.
People had commented on it on the internet.
So he filed a lawsuit.
But not this lawsuit (which Scott Greenfield has dubbed "Rakofsky v. Internet"). This one.
Not these comments (list at the end of Josh's post).
Not this newspaper.
Not this situation (this one, if you're interested).
Dear Texas Legislative Republican Cretins
Who should decide whether your children may be spanked while at school?
Your national government;
Your state government;
Your local government;
Their teachers; or
You?
Republicans in the Texas Legislature think the answer should be "your local government." Allowing you to decide whether teachers are allowed to spank your children, in their view, represents "big government intrusion."
Okay, Republicans, let's review: parents are not government. You have been saying for decades that parents, and not government, should be in charge of children's moral development. And now you want to put local government in charge.
Look, if I tell my kids' school principal that if some teacher hits my children I will rain indelible public humiliation on him his family to the third degree of consanguinity in every direction, that's not "big government intrusion"; it's just a friendly word to the wise. You want to prosecute me if I have to carry through on the promise? Fair enough; I know how much you people like to prosecute people. Under your reasoning, though, a law allowing parents to home-school their children would represent "big government intrusion." It's not. Big government intrusion is not "me raising my children as fulfilled and successful leaders and members of society who will treat your children with far more compassion and respect than your children, the whipped serf offspring of morons, deserve."
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
