06 February 2004
Overstating the gang problem.
The problem with the primary source for this article's argument is that he has shown that local law enforcement can handle the problem: "L.A. recently made headlines by cutting its murder rate by 22 percent from the previous year." The claim that cracking down is moving street gangs to other nearby locales is not easily believable. Street gangs are almost always tied to a territory where the members live and are not all that mobile.
The problem with the primary source for this article's argument is that he has shown that local law enforcement can handle the problem: "L.A. recently made headlines by cutting its murder rate by 22 percent from the previous year." The claim that cracking down is moving street gangs to other nearby locales is not easily believable. Street gangs are almost always tied to a territory where the members live and are not all that mobile.
05 February 2004
Bryan Gates has seems to have spotted the person I've been looking to interview ever since I was retained on this case (give it a few seconds to redirect completely). And apparently he resides in people's backyards (at least for now).
If this guy had waited 5 more minutes - until the delivery guy left - he would have gotten away with shipping himself via cargo jet to his parents' house. Now he has to pay more than a first class ticket and he's going to be locked in his house for four months (which should feel absolutely spacious).
In a turn which I am sure will surprise all of us who practice criminal law, the detective who interviewed Kobe was "unable" to turn on his tape recorder during the portion of the conversation which could determine whether the talk was constitutional or not. However, in a lucky break, he was able to get it to work during the part of the conversation which he thought was incriminating.
A Trooper in Minnesota is charged with driving her car up to 126 mph, wrecking into a civilian car, and lying about it - all in an attempt to get to a hockey game.
04 February 2004
This is absolutely not a true statement:
Oh, you mean that kind of "alternative lifestyle."
This might seem unlikely at a place like W&L, which the Princeton Review has dubbed the campus most nostalgic for Ronald Reagan, a place where alternative lifestyles are not an alternative.That is absolutely not true. Alternative lifestyles were common when I was there. Not everybody was a Conservative - a good number were Libertarians. Not every window had the Battle Flag - some had the Stars and Bars. Not all thought Reagan was the best president - some liked Nixon or Bush the Elder (and some were way out there and liked Teddy Roosevelt). Not everybody joined the Federalist Society - well, okay, that was mainly because it was redundant. Not everybody joined a fraternity - they didn't rush law students. See, there was plenty of diversity while I was there.
Oh, you mean that kind of "alternative lifestyle."
More talk about how poor indigent representation is in Virginia.
We don't get paid enough, take too many cases, don't put enough work into our cases, and cannot get proper expert support. The offered solution? "[A]n oversight commission for indigent defense that would establish standards for training, experience and caseloads." Translation: A group of people with agendas who will try to set unrealistic requirements.
Look, if you want to fix the system there are three changes which would fix most current problems. First, increase the fee cap by at least 100%. Second, make the prosecution give the Defense attorney the police report. Third, make the prosecution give the Defense counsel an exact xerox copy of his client's record. This would allow Defense counsel (1) to take fewer cases and still be able to pay his bills, (2) to size up the case quickly and better advise his client, and (3) to be able to make an accurate assessment of what the sentencing guidelines range might be (it's amazing but 90% of clients cannot tell you what is on their records). This would make the system work far better than it does currently.
Much to their credit, many prosecutors already do the second and third steps but some jurisdictions continue to play games. Why? Because they can.
Link via SW Virginia Law Blog.
We don't get paid enough, take too many cases, don't put enough work into our cases, and cannot get proper expert support. The offered solution? "[A]n oversight commission for indigent defense that would establish standards for training, experience and caseloads." Translation: A group of people with agendas who will try to set unrealistic requirements.
Look, if you want to fix the system there are three changes which would fix most current problems. First, increase the fee cap by at least 100%. Second, make the prosecution give the Defense attorney the police report. Third, make the prosecution give the Defense counsel an exact xerox copy of his client's record. This would allow Defense counsel (1) to take fewer cases and still be able to pay his bills, (2) to size up the case quickly and better advise his client, and (3) to be able to make an accurate assessment of what the sentencing guidelines range might be (it's amazing but 90% of clients cannot tell you what is on their records). This would make the system work far better than it does currently.
Much to their credit, many prosecutors already do the second and third steps but some jurisdictions continue to play games. Why? Because they can.
Link via SW Virginia Law Blog.
03 February 2004
Yet another judge leaves the Bench because of federal sentencing guidelines. LvHB.
The Curmudgeonly Clerk comments about the judge's reliance on Christian scripture as part of his reason.
The Curmudgeonly Clerk comments about the judge's reliance on Christian scripture as part of his reason.
The Prosecutor in Richmond "plans to designate two of his staff attorneys to investigate and prosecute truant students, their parents and, if necessary, even recalcitrant school officials." Because the Richmond Juvenile and Domestic Courts aren't already overrun enough.
Anybody think Hicks is prepping for his run for mayor for once it becomes an independent office?
Anybody think Hicks is prepping for his run for mayor for once it becomes an independent office?
NO DAMMIT!!!
Making the DUI laws even tougher to pander to the prohibitionists is not going stop drunk driving. Listen closely and repeat after me: TAKING PEOPLE'S LICENSES DOES NOT STOP THEM FROM DRIVING BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO OTHER WAY OF GETTING TO WORK TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES. ALL IT DOES IS INSURE AN ENDLESS STREAM OF HARDWORKING PEOPLE WHO ARE IN AND OUT OF JAIL AND PUT FURTHER AND FURTHER INTO DEBT TO THE COURT SYSTEM.
AAAAaaarrrrgggggg!!!!!!!!!!
And now they are trying to take a person's license for life? For life? And what a joy it will be standing in court 12 years after my client's last conviction for anything watching him get sentenced to a year in jail because he had a broken taillight as he drove to pick up his wife when her car broke down at 2 a.m. Don't think it will happen? I know it will; I still get to stand in court next to guys who are under the old habitual offender laws and watch this sort of thing happen (although, mercifully, that old draconian law is slowly weeding itself out of the system).
I understand why it is hard for legislators to vote against these kinds of bills. But sometime, somehow the madness of taking peoples' licenses in Virginia for everything under the sun has got to stop
Making the DUI laws even tougher to pander to the prohibitionists is not going stop drunk driving. Listen closely and repeat after me: TAKING PEOPLE'S LICENSES DOES NOT STOP THEM FROM DRIVING BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO OTHER WAY OF GETTING TO WORK TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES. ALL IT DOES IS INSURE AN ENDLESS STREAM OF HARDWORKING PEOPLE WHO ARE IN AND OUT OF JAIL AND PUT FURTHER AND FURTHER INTO DEBT TO THE COURT SYSTEM.
AAAAaaarrrrgggggg!!!!!!!!!!
And now they are trying to take a person's license for life? For life? And what a joy it will be standing in court 12 years after my client's last conviction for anything watching him get sentenced to a year in jail because he had a broken taillight as he drove to pick up his wife when her car broke down at 2 a.m. Don't think it will happen? I know it will; I still get to stand in court next to guys who are under the old habitual offender laws and watch this sort of thing happen (although, mercifully, that old draconian law is slowly weeding itself out of the system).
I understand why it is hard for legislators to vote against these kinds of bills. But sometime, somehow the madness of taking peoples' licenses in Virginia for everything under the sun has got to stop
A judge lets a homeless guy out of prison for two months and the guy comes back.
"Sometimes, you just have to have faith," the judge said. "I've got 65 years under my belt, and I've spent 13 of them looking down from the bench at defendants. You get to the point that you know who you can trust and who you can't."
02 February 2004
"The lawyer for music legend Phil Spector has a mystery piece of evidence in the murder case but is refusing to turn it over, a prosecutor said Thursday."
Now that's interesting. I know, in Virginia at least, if my client hands me incriminating evidence I cannot keep it (generally interpreted as handing the knife back to client and telling him he's not paying me enough to go to jail myself). I suspect the same general rule would apply if my investigator found something and brought it to me (and shortly thereafter he would lose his job - he should have left it where it was and told me about it).
However, if the evidence is exculpatory I don't believe I have a duty to disclose. So the prosecutor's nightmare in a case like this is that I have a knife with the victim's blood and the butler's fingerprints or even worse a security tape of the butler doing the deed. If he cannot find this out before trial he is going to be in for an awful shock. Of course, it's almost impossible to defend yourself without revealing what the piece of evidence is, so prosecutors can bring motions like this in order to fish some.
Caveat: I do not know the law of evidence in California. For all I know it requires full disclosure of physical evidence by both parties.
Now that's interesting. I know, in Virginia at least, if my client hands me incriminating evidence I cannot keep it (generally interpreted as handing the knife back to client and telling him he's not paying me enough to go to jail myself). I suspect the same general rule would apply if my investigator found something and brought it to me (and shortly thereafter he would lose his job - he should have left it where it was and told me about it).
However, if the evidence is exculpatory I don't believe I have a duty to disclose. So the prosecutor's nightmare in a case like this is that I have a knife with the victim's blood and the butler's fingerprints or even worse a security tape of the butler doing the deed. If he cannot find this out before trial he is going to be in for an awful shock. Of course, it's almost impossible to defend yourself without revealing what the piece of evidence is, so prosecutors can bring motions like this in order to fish some.
Caveat: I do not know the law of evidence in California. For all I know it requires full disclosure of physical evidence by both parties.
Don't get on the wrong side of the authorities in England or they might get "anti-social behaviour orders" against you banning you from using bicycles or banishing you.
Remind me not to try and rob any farmers in South Africa:
A 73-year-old Eastern Cape farmer who was forced to drive two robbers around in his sedan car shocked them when he drove off a 30m cliff, police said today.
Called Out:
A Judge in England wants proof that this guy actually has the bona fides to practice law.
A Judge in England wants proof that this guy actually has the bona fides to practice law.
01 February 2004
Crescat Sententia and Blog or not? are discussing whether a Libertarian Presidential candidate's proposal to keep prisoners confined to bed for long periods of time is unconstitutional. The proposition is an interesting one but I think not a practical one. The only way I can think of to keep them in bed for that time is chains and I'm pretty sure that would be unconstitutional. Anyway, how do they use the restroom (don't tell me bed pans because I'm sure we can all visualize what numerous prisoners who want to get out of bed will do instead of using one)?
As to the constitutionality, while I haven't heard of anyone enforcing bedtime like this, I know that a lot of prisons do the functional equivilent by feeding unruly prisoners "prison loaf." It's a particularly bland mix (one recipe here) which when fed to a prisoner over a period of time takes all the energy out of them (or so I've been told by guards). And, to my knowledge, no one has suggested it is unconstitutional.
As to the constitutionality, while I haven't heard of anyone enforcing bedtime like this, I know that a lot of prisons do the functional equivilent by feeding unruly prisoners "prison loaf." It's a particularly bland mix (one recipe here) which when fed to a prisoner over a period of time takes all the energy out of them (or so I've been told by guards). And, to my knowledge, no one has suggested it is unconstitutional.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)