Appointed lawyers who do more than offer a plea bargain?
NY Times:
The DA's office was attempting to revoke the probation of the young black man I was representing on the theory that he had an unexplained possession of a stolen boombox from a burglary. When I interviewed him he said he bought it from a guy and gave me his name.
He also had alibi witnesses for the time of burglary that I interviewed. The guy he claimed to have bought the boombox from was also an inmate in the Travis County jail and I interviewed him and he confirmed the young man's story. I had all these witnesses ready to testify at the revocation hearing, but it turned out I did not need them.
The Assistant DA put the police officer who arrested him on the stand and on cross-examination he confirmed my client's story i.e. the guy I was representing had explained his possession of the boombox as being purchased. The DA rested and then all hell seemed to break loose.
The long-time judge boomed, "You can't rest. You haven't proved your case."
The ADA tried to argue that it was an unexplained possession of stolen goods, and the judge in so many words asked him if he listened to his own witness on cross-examination. The judge then angrily slammed his gavel and said, "Dismissed."
As I got up to leave the courtroom the three people at the DA's table were verbally upset with me instead of the guy who did not prove his case. I guess they thought I worked too hard on a case that generally was a ticket to hard-time.
When I got out of law school and had passed the bar, I took an appointed case and did something that seemed to surprise everyone in the courtroom. I won.His Clients Weren’t Complaining. But the Judge Said This Lawyer Worked Too Hard.
When judges appoint the lawyers in their courtroom, speed can be more important than a vigorous defense, a lawsuit says.
The DA's office was attempting to revoke the probation of the young black man I was representing on the theory that he had an unexplained possession of a stolen boombox from a burglary. When I interviewed him he said he bought it from a guy and gave me his name.
He also had alibi witnesses for the time of burglary that I interviewed. The guy he claimed to have bought the boombox from was also an inmate in the Travis County jail and I interviewed him and he confirmed the young man's story. I had all these witnesses ready to testify at the revocation hearing, but it turned out I did not need them.
The Assistant DA put the police officer who arrested him on the stand and on cross-examination he confirmed my client's story i.e. the guy I was representing had explained his possession of the boombox as being purchased. The DA rested and then all hell seemed to break loose.
The long-time judge boomed, "You can't rest. You haven't proved your case."
The ADA tried to argue that it was an unexplained possession of stolen goods, and the judge in so many words asked him if he listened to his own witness on cross-examination. The judge then angrily slammed his gavel and said, "Dismissed."
As I got up to leave the courtroom the three people at the DA's table were verbally upset with me instead of the guy who did not prove his case. I guess they thought I worked too hard on a case that generally was a ticket to hard-time.
Comments
Post a Comment