Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Around the Blogs

Cyn­thia Hen­ley explains Why the Defense Does not Share Info with the State.

Ken Lam­mers (Crim­Law) encoun­ters a unique pun­ish­ment strat­egy form a defense lawyer in At Least Buy Me Din­ner First.

Rick Horowitz (Prob­a­ble Cause) explains why, if you’re in a car that was stopped on the road, You Just Got Pwned!

Brian Tan­nebaum (Crim­i­nal Defense) is tired of the bull­shit of “We Have No One In Cus­tody, Legally.”

Paul Smith (The Life and TImes of a Texas Coun­try Trial Lawyer) asks, Can You OD On Therapy?

And, inspired by Mike’s (Crime & Fed­er­al­ism) kvetch, here are five from out­side my usual list of sus­pect blog sources:

Mitch Ditkoff (The Heart of Inno­va­tion) lists 100 Sim­ple, Low-Cost, Soul­ful Ways to Be More Cre­ative on the Job. (Why it’s impor­tant: crim­i­nal defense is 10% toil, 10% luck, and 99% cre­ativ­ity.)

Mike him­self asks, Ira Sorkin Got Paid … For What? A rea­son­able question.

Scott Hen­son (Grits For Break­fast) says that scent line­ups by dogs don’t pass the smell test.

Brad Bogan (Fifth Cir­cuit Blog) notes, in Melendez-Diaz, Ille­gal Reen­try, and Cer­tifi­cates of Non-Existence of Record:

Okay, so where do we go from here? Given the sheer num­ber of ille­gal reen­try pros­e­cu­tions, it’s obvi­ous that the chief records cus­to­dian of what­ever agency it is that main­tains the rel­e­vant records can’t pos­si­bly be avail­able to tes­tify should a suf­fi­cient num­ber of ille­gal reen­try cases pro­ceed to trial. And yet, a CNR won’t cut it, if a defen­dant objects to its admis­sion. So con­ceiv­ably, if enough defen­dants charged with ille­gal reen­try demand a trial, the Gov­ern­ment will be unable to prove its case in most instances.

Finally, Dan Hull (What About Clients?) announces in No-Name, No-Publish that What About Clients? is now a proud Wuss-Free Zone.

Right behind you, Dan.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

2 Responses to “Around the Blogs”

  1. shg says:

    First Lam­mers, now Ben­nett. I may qual­ify for the Ned Beatty excep­tion to Dan Hull’s no-wuss rule. What’s that? Do I hear a banjo strum­ming in the back­ground. Oh my god, no…no…

  2. Hull says:

    And some­one less savory is right behind Scott, too? Tough club, that Club Ned. Seri­ous dues. Thanks for the men­tion, Mark. All the help we can get. — Dan Hull (PA) and Rob Bod­ine (DC)

Leave a non-anonymous Reply