Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Back to Federal Court

| May 17, 2010

I believe strongly that federal criminal trials can be won—the Government, while powerful, is not omnipotent. Because of this belief, I have tried more federal criminal cases than state misdemeanor cases; my first jury trial ever was a bank robbery case in Lee Rosenthal's court. Some years ago, I aspired for a brief time to [...]

Share

On Triage and Semantics

| May 12, 2010

[This fragment has been hanging around for weeks in ScribeFire. It has nothing to do with Norm Pattis's Triage post, except that the title of Norm's post reminded me of this one. It has much to do with "I need a lawyer just to. . ." and this comment on magic words.] Quoth Greenfield: [Lawyers] [...]

Share

“I need a lawyer just to . . .”

| May 12, 2010

“I’m looking for a lawyer just to . . .” This is a bad-news call. “Just to” has one of three implications, none of which involve situations that you want to get into. Get off the phone as quickly as you can. First, “just to” can mean “for only the following activities, which are a [...]

Share

The Trespass Problem I

| April 30, 2010

Here’s Texas’s criminal trespass statute. In relevant part, a person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on or in property of another without effective consent and the person received notice to depart but failed to do so. “Effective consent” includes consent by a person legally authorized to act for the owner. And [...]

Share

Ask Avvo

| April 27, 2010

Seen on Avvo: I am a resident physician in Houston, TX. A charge of indecent exposure has been brought against me by a complaining witness- no other witnesses or evidence involved. I had a warrant for my arrest, for which I went it for booking and was released on bail. Pretrial hearing is set for [...]

Share

Rethinking Peeler

| April 26, 2010

Rick Casey thinks we Texas criminal-defense lawyers are “coddled” (Paul Kennedy) because the Texas Supreme Court declared in 1995 in Peeler v. Hughes and Luce that, unless a criminal defendant is acquitted, his criminal acts are—as a matter of law—the sole proximate cause of his conviction and punishment. Andrew Winters commented from New Hampshire:

Share

Padilla v. Kentucky

| March 31, 2010

Immigration law can be complex, and it is a legal specialty of its own. Some members of the bar who represent clients facing criminal charges, in either state or federal court or both, may not be well versed in it.  There will, therefore, undoubtedly be numerous situations in which the deportation consequences of a particular [...]

Share

Google Blog Bundle

| February 1, 2010

42 criminal defense blogs.

Share

The Question: Seven Answers

| January 8, 2010

Here is The Question: Why do you defend people who you know to be factually guilty? The question is often phrased as “How . . .” or “How can you sleep at night when you . . .” but those demand smartass answers like “very well” or “on a pillowcase full of hundred-dollar bills.” Typically, [...]

Share

Lizards Don’t Laugh.

| November 30, 2009

Personal injury lawyer Paul Luvera has written about Applying Reptile Concepts in Trial—describing how plaintiffs’ lawyers should appeal to jurors’ reptile brains. The reptile brain is the core of the human brain, sitting right at the top of the spine surrounded by the later-developing dog brain and ape brain. The reptile brain is a survival [...]

Share

Bad Behavior has blocked 2490 access attempts in the last 7 days.