I'm a criminal attorney. I am not a public defender. I'm in private practice. And if I was forced to choose, I would never take as an attorney someone from the public defender's office. Read on to find out why.
First things first, the point of this article is not to bag on public defenders. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I'm just trying to make a point about a broken system, in a way. The point of this article is also not to scare people into hiring private criminal attorneys. I think you choose who you have to choose.
If you are ever in court, or are ever bored and go to court, and want to see the difference between a private criminal lawyer and a public defender, just look at them. The people that you see waiting patiently with one person sitting with them, maybe two, that's the private criminal defense attorney. Now, look for the person with a stack of files in their hands walking frantically from person to person. That's the public defender. And that's why I wouldn't use one.
It really has nothing to do with their level of expertise or their skills as attorneys. In fact, they may be some of the best criminal lawyers out there. But because they are so busy, there is no way they can be the best criminal lawyer for your case. It's simply not possible. The work that your case needs and deserves simply takes too much time.
And public defenders have no time.
Public defenders are simply overworked. They are asked to handle caseloads that far exceed anyone's abilities. No case suffers horribly, but all suffer just enough that things can be missed, subtleties, that might be picked up if only they had a little bit more time.
If you're faced with a criminal charge and need to make a decision, think long and hard about it. Whichever way you go, be confident knowing you have a good DUI attorney helping you. Just accept that your public defender is working under constraints they have no control over.
5.18.2010
5.09.2010
Criminal Attorneys | Trial Attorney or Travel Agent
I was at a trial advocacy training class this past weekend learning to become a better trail attorney through the use of better voir dire techniques, better opening statement techniques, and better case preparation techniques. I was in a room full of criminal attorneys, and it was an amazing group of people.
Each of these criminal lawyers was there for one reason - they see a lot of trials in their future and they want to get as good as they can at advocating during a trial. They took time away from their jobs and practices to do this, and they gave up most of their Saturday (which just happened to be the first beautiful Saturday in Seattle in about 6 weeks. But we all learned something. And we'll all be better trial lawyers because of it.
One of the great things I heard while I was there was a comparison between the two different types of criminal defense attorneys out there. The first is who I see myself as as a criminal lawyer. I am a trial attorney. I work hard for my clients. And if the state's offer sucks or my client doesn't want to take it, then we go to trial. This is the type of person you want on your team if you are in trouble.
The second type of criminal attorney is the travel agent. As the name implies, this type of criminal lawyer is simply there to escort you through the process, from criminal charge to jail time. They aren't interested in trials. They aren't interested in working up your case the way it needs to be worked up to give you the best chance of winning.
If you ever find yourself in trouble, make sure you hire a trial attorney and not a travel agent. It can mean the difference between a bad outcome and a great outcome.
Each of these criminal lawyers was there for one reason - they see a lot of trials in their future and they want to get as good as they can at advocating during a trial. They took time away from their jobs and practices to do this, and they gave up most of their Saturday (which just happened to be the first beautiful Saturday in Seattle in about 6 weeks. But we all learned something. And we'll all be better trial lawyers because of it.
One of the great things I heard while I was there was a comparison between the two different types of criminal defense attorneys out there. The first is who I see myself as as a criminal lawyer. I am a trial attorney. I work hard for my clients. And if the state's offer sucks or my client doesn't want to take it, then we go to trial. This is the type of person you want on your team if you are in trouble.
The second type of criminal attorney is the travel agent. As the name implies, this type of criminal lawyer is simply there to escort you through the process, from criminal charge to jail time. They aren't interested in trials. They aren't interested in working up your case the way it needs to be worked up to give you the best chance of winning.
If you ever find yourself in trouble, make sure you hire a trial attorney and not a travel agent. It can mean the difference between a bad outcome and a great outcome.
3.15.2010
Seattle Criminal Attorney | Bench Trial or Jury Trial?
So you have been accused of a wrong. Possibly a DUI, maybe an beating, maybe a larceny. And the state isn't giving you anything you feel at ease taking as a plea bargain. Your Seattle criminal attorney informs you the only option, if you don't want the proposition, is a trial.
You're okay with that, but are a bit cautious about the particulars. In particular, you are not certain whether you ought to ask for a jury trial or request a bench trial. Your Seattle criminal attorney is pushing for a jury trial, however you simply don't know if you can rely on a group of individuals you do not know to make the correct judgment.
Picking between a jury trial or a bench trial (where the judge makes the conclusion of your guilt or innocence) can at times be hard (even for us criminal attorneys!). Let's look at a couple of scenarios that may need you to go one way or another.
To begin with, the jury trial. You like jury trials since jurors usually are not as cynical as judges (they've heard lots of excuses over the years and begin to stop trying to tell the difference). They endeavor fiercely to do the just thing and will habitually furnish you at least a fighting opportunity. On the contrary they can be unpredictable also.
You habitually desire a jury trial when the case is fairly shaky, when you get various inconsistencies in the facts that just do not make sense, and when you want the fact finder to give you the benefit of the doubt. Juries are capable of doing this. With judges it's a little more hard.
After that, the bench trial. You commonly like to have these when you have a exceedingly technical defense, the details of the case are truly upsetting (the jury will virtually be certain to be in opposition to you from the start), or you are going to found your defense on a legal topic that you think the judge will value better than a jury. This also is a crap shoot, as judges, though not unpredictable, have a propensity to tilt in the direction of the prosecution.
In the end, the verdict to go jury trial or bench trial should possibly be completed by your Seattle criminal lawyer. They possess the practice to appreciate which one to use, and they recognize the intricacy of the verdict. No matter which you decide on, though, it's doubtless going to be an uphill struggle. Good luck!
You're okay with that, but are a bit cautious about the particulars. In particular, you are not certain whether you ought to ask for a jury trial or request a bench trial. Your Seattle criminal attorney is pushing for a jury trial, however you simply don't know if you can rely on a group of individuals you do not know to make the correct judgment.
Picking between a jury trial or a bench trial (where the judge makes the conclusion of your guilt or innocence) can at times be hard (even for us criminal attorneys!). Let's look at a couple of scenarios that may need you to go one way or another.
To begin with, the jury trial. You like jury trials since jurors usually are not as cynical as judges (they've heard lots of excuses over the years and begin to stop trying to tell the difference). They endeavor fiercely to do the just thing and will habitually furnish you at least a fighting opportunity. On the contrary they can be unpredictable also.
You habitually desire a jury trial when the case is fairly shaky, when you get various inconsistencies in the facts that just do not make sense, and when you want the fact finder to give you the benefit of the doubt. Juries are capable of doing this. With judges it's a little more hard.
After that, the bench trial. You commonly like to have these when you have a exceedingly technical defense, the details of the case are truly upsetting (the jury will virtually be certain to be in opposition to you from the start), or you are going to found your defense on a legal topic that you think the judge will value better than a jury. This also is a crap shoot, as judges, though not unpredictable, have a propensity to tilt in the direction of the prosecution.
In the end, the verdict to go jury trial or bench trial should possibly be completed by your Seattle criminal lawyer. They possess the practice to appreciate which one to use, and they recognize the intricacy of the verdict. No matter which you decide on, though, it's doubtless going to be an uphill struggle. Good luck!
1.05.2010
Seattle Criminal Attorney | Take the Breath Test or No?
Determining whether or not to take on a breath examination if you were seized for DUI used to be a gigantic choice (even for a Seattle criminal attorney. If you were requested to take on a blood alcohol analysis and said no, you were subjecting yourself to increased consequences for refusing, but had the benefit moving onward of not having to fight blood alcohol test results.
Well, nowadays it appears more and more likely that the situation may take place where you might reject a blood alcohol assessment, face the more stringent consequences for the denial, and nonetheless be subject to giving blood alcohol results.
Most, if not all states, have fashioned DUI laws that incorporate implied consent laws. In brief, these laws state that if you drive on the thoroughfare in the state where an implied consent law exists, you are impliedly consenting to a breath examination if the cops have probable cause to think you are DUI. Built into these implied consent laws, however, is the facility to say no the blood alcohol assessment if you so decide. The downside to denial, however, is the imposition of worse costs if found guilty of DUI (and a longer license revocation - for case in point, in Seattle, WA a denial subjects you to a year license suspension as opposed to 90 days).
But, things have changed a bit recently that really worry us criminal attorneys. The cops have started going to judges and asking for search warrants when people decline blood alcohol tests. And quite a few judges have upheld this practice (the way the courts perceive it, the denial has to do with the implied consent laws, not necessarily your right to be free from searches - that is covered by the fourth amendment, which can be overcome by indicating probable cause to a judge and obtaining a search warrant.
One detail is assured. If you have the facility to tell with criminal attorneys Seattle before deciding whether or not to take on a blood alcohol analysis, you should do so. The issues revolving around breath test denial are getting more and more complicated every day, and the only way you can be certain you are doing what is best for you is by speaking with an practiced Seattle DUI attorney and learning all of your options.
Related Posts:
Well, nowadays it appears more and more likely that the situation may take place where you might reject a blood alcohol assessment, face the more stringent consequences for the denial, and nonetheless be subject to giving blood alcohol results.
Most, if not all states, have fashioned DUI laws that incorporate implied consent laws. In brief, these laws state that if you drive on the thoroughfare in the state where an implied consent law exists, you are impliedly consenting to a breath examination if the cops have probable cause to think you are DUI. Built into these implied consent laws, however, is the facility to say no the blood alcohol assessment if you so decide. The downside to denial, however, is the imposition of worse costs if found guilty of DUI (and a longer license revocation - for case in point, in Seattle, WA a denial subjects you to a year license suspension as opposed to 90 days).
But, things have changed a bit recently that really worry us criminal attorneys. The cops have started going to judges and asking for search warrants when people decline blood alcohol tests. And quite a few judges have upheld this practice (the way the courts perceive it, the denial has to do with the implied consent laws, not necessarily your right to be free from searches - that is covered by the fourth amendment, which can be overcome by indicating probable cause to a judge and obtaining a search warrant.
One detail is assured. If you have the facility to tell with criminal attorneys Seattle before deciding whether or not to take on a blood alcohol analysis, you should do so. The issues revolving around breath test denial are getting more and more complicated every day, and the only way you can be certain you are doing what is best for you is by speaking with an practiced Seattle DUI attorney and learning all of your options.
Related Posts:
Seattle Criminal Attorney | How a Good One Can Help
Seattle Criminal Attorney | Testimonial Evidence Explained
12.29.2009
Seattle DUI Attorney Explains the Idea of Corpus Delicti
Nobody desires to be acquainted with or speak to a criminal attorney until they are in trouble. There is a specific jinx or hex that people seem to believe pursue folks seeking out criminal information before they need it. Nevertheless, once you are charged with a crime, you rapidly realize how important a good Seattle criminal attorney is.
And some of the need for a criminal attorney is the requirement to decipher all of the legal gibberish that is tossed back and forth between the judge and the attorneys. Here are just a couple of words you might hear at some stage in your criminal process, some you may well be on familiar terms with, some you may perhaps not: hearsay, nunc pro tunc; arraignment; omnibus; voir dire; res ipsa loquitor; and on and on.
Well, I'm here today to help you comprehend what one of folks legal terms means - corpus delicti. This is a word you might not hear spouted in court a lot, but it is an important term for your defense attorney to know, particularly if you have confessed to a felony and he or she wants to try to get that confession suppressed. So that you better understand the word, I've broken it down for you below.
As I said above, corpus delicti arises most repeatedly in the situation of confessions, and particularly in the situation of confessions where not a lot of additional evidence exists against the defendant. see, judges and courts, though more than ready to let in a confession if one is provided, don't necessarily like confessions, particularly if they are the lone thing the proseuctor has on a defendant. The reason is, we know false confessions are provided from time to time. And we be on familiar terms with that juries place in awfully high regard confessions of defendants. So, judges and courts are hesitant to allow confessions in unless there is some additional impartial facts of the criminal act.
And that supplementary unrelated support of a criminal act is what corpus delicti stands for. If there is no corpus delicti, or supplementary independent proof of a felony, the court will not permit in a confession since there is the likelihood (whether sensible or otherwise) that the confession was mistakenly provided. Still a little bit puzzled as to what it means? How about an example.
Let's say there is a chap. He is standing out in a parking lot with some supplementary citizens around some vehicles. Let's say the individuals in the sedan and the citizens out of the auto get into a yelling match, for whatever reason. In the end, the dudes in the sedan choose to leave. As they are pulling away, the driver hears a clatter on his automobile and turns around. He doesn't glimpse anybody touching his car or necessarily by his sedan, but there is solitary one person in the area. The guy in the sedan doesn't check his automobile out until later, when he observes a dent in the side of his sedan. He assumes it was the guy he saw around his auto earlier.
The cops go and pick up the man they suspect of harming the car and take him down to the cops station. After some chatting and interrogating, they get the guy to admit to kicking the auto. He is arrested and charged with malicious mischief.
In this state of affairs, do you sense the rule of corpus delicti exists here? With no the confession, all the cops have for facts is the chap hearing something happen to his automobile, turn around, and observe the gentleman near the auto. What is omitted is any facts that the chap hit the van, and that he did it with an intent to scratch the vehicle. It is feasible (in theory, if no declaration of guilt had been provided) that he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time when the man turned around. For a case like that a corpus delicti line of reasoning might be a way to get the confession suppressed.
Corpus delicti, like most supplementary Latin legal expressions, are not tricky to know once they are clarified. But getting that description can be a very difficult process at times. So why chance misunderstanding a question or a direction for the reason that you don't have the legal teaching of the prosecutors? The moment you are placed under arrest or deem like you can't leave is the minute you should demand to converse with a Seattle criminal attorney. A criminal defense lawyer can not only help you through the labyrinth of legal nonsense, but facilitate you to keep your lips shut and the police off your back.
Hopefully you are learning something from the Seattle Criminal Attorney Blog. If you are, let me know!
Related Posts:
And some of the need for a criminal attorney is the requirement to decipher all of the legal gibberish that is tossed back and forth between the judge and the attorneys. Here are just a couple of words you might hear at some stage in your criminal process, some you may well be on familiar terms with, some you may perhaps not: hearsay, nunc pro tunc; arraignment; omnibus; voir dire; res ipsa loquitor; and on and on.
Well, I'm here today to help you comprehend what one of folks legal terms means - corpus delicti. This is a word you might not hear spouted in court a lot, but it is an important term for your defense attorney to know, particularly if you have confessed to a felony and he or she wants to try to get that confession suppressed. So that you better understand the word, I've broken it down for you below.
As I said above, corpus delicti arises most repeatedly in the situation of confessions, and particularly in the situation of confessions where not a lot of additional evidence exists against the defendant. see, judges and courts, though more than ready to let in a confession if one is provided, don't necessarily like confessions, particularly if they are the lone thing the proseuctor has on a defendant. The reason is, we know false confessions are provided from time to time. And we be on familiar terms with that juries place in awfully high regard confessions of defendants. So, judges and courts are hesitant to allow confessions in unless there is some additional impartial facts of the criminal act.
And that supplementary unrelated support of a criminal act is what corpus delicti stands for. If there is no corpus delicti, or supplementary independent proof of a felony, the court will not permit in a confession since there is the likelihood (whether sensible or otherwise) that the confession was mistakenly provided. Still a little bit puzzled as to what it means? How about an example.
Let's say there is a chap. He is standing out in a parking lot with some supplementary citizens around some vehicles. Let's say the individuals in the sedan and the citizens out of the auto get into a yelling match, for whatever reason. In the end, the dudes in the sedan choose to leave. As they are pulling away, the driver hears a clatter on his automobile and turns around. He doesn't glimpse anybody touching his car or necessarily by his sedan, but there is solitary one person in the area. The guy in the sedan doesn't check his automobile out until later, when he observes a dent in the side of his sedan. He assumes it was the guy he saw around his auto earlier.
The cops go and pick up the man they suspect of harming the car and take him down to the cops station. After some chatting and interrogating, they get the guy to admit to kicking the auto. He is arrested and charged with malicious mischief.
In this state of affairs, do you sense the rule of corpus delicti exists here? With no the confession, all the cops have for facts is the chap hearing something happen to his automobile, turn around, and observe the gentleman near the auto. What is omitted is any facts that the chap hit the van, and that he did it with an intent to scratch the vehicle. It is feasible (in theory, if no declaration of guilt had been provided) that he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time when the man turned around. For a case like that a corpus delicti line of reasoning might be a way to get the confession suppressed.
Corpus delicti, like most supplementary Latin legal expressions, are not tricky to know once they are clarified. But getting that description can be a very difficult process at times. So why chance misunderstanding a question or a direction for the reason that you don't have the legal teaching of the prosecutors? The moment you are placed under arrest or deem like you can't leave is the minute you should demand to converse with a Seattle criminal attorney. A criminal defense lawyer can not only help you through the labyrinth of legal nonsense, but facilitate you to keep your lips shut and the police off your back.
Hopefully you are learning something from the Seattle Criminal Attorney Blog. If you are, let me know!
Related Posts:
Seattle Criminal Attorney | Arraignment
Seattle Criminal Attorney | Crawford Explained
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
