posted
Well, not really. Tomorrow, for the first time, I go to my field office for my prosecution clinic. I have a third-year practice certificate, so I will be trying real cases, probably within a couple of weeks. As it approaches, the prospect of sending people to jail is far more intimidating than I anticipated. Even though I probably won't be doing that for at least a month (we start on traffic and misdemeanors).
It's very strange to be about to do what I've been preparing to do for the last 3 years (counting LSAT and application time before I started law school).
posted
I think it's good to be intimidated by the prospect of sending people to jail. It shows you're taking it seriously. If you ever start thinking of it as "no big deal," it will be time to find a new job.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I would be completely overwhelmed - this is serious, *real* stuff!
I'm sure you'll be fantastic though. And, as dkw said - it's when you're *not* worrying about the consequences of your actions in putting people in jail that you know you have a problem.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Prosecuting traffic offenders is a noble profession and should not be viewed as merely a stepping stone. People who drive recklessly or under the influence, or who drive while suspended/revoked are responsible for about 40% of the deaths on our roadways and probably a like proportion of the injuries and overall crashes.
They are 4x as likely as other drivers to cause a fatal crash.
It is often difficult to educate prosecutors and judges as to the seriousness of the consequences. Do try to resist throwing out the driving while under suspension charges as part of a plea bargain. Those things need to be treated seriously!
posted
Personally, if I'm ever in court, I'd rather have you be the defense attorney, or even the judge. Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm curious, Dag, why did you wait until you were like 32 to get started on becoming a lawyer? I guess you've described the case with the student paper before. I just wonder what your journey was from graduation with the 4 year degree to deciding to take the LSAT.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you ever start thinking of it as "no big deal," it will be time to find a new job.
Definitely. I can't conceive of that right now, but of course it's possible.
quote:o try to resist throwing out the driving while under suspension charges as part of a plea bargain. Those things need to be treated seriously!
Go get 'em!!!
Bob, the first thing I saw was a group of appeals of ten to thirty day sentences for driving while suspended. In Virginia, any misdemeanor is tried in general district court without a jury; any conviction may be appealed to circuit court, which tries the case all over again. The prosecutors get quite ticked off when the circuit judges suspend their sentences. I will be handling these misdemeanor appeals next month.
quote:Hmmm, do you have a bunch of parking meters I can take the heads off of?
Only if you like boiled eggs.
quote:How can you be cool AND a lawyer??
Muscle control.
quote:Personally, if I'm ever in court, I'd rather have you be the defense attorney, or even the judge.
Thanks.
quote:(insert lawyer joke here)
That's an old one. I like (insert another lawyer joke here) much better.
quote:I'm curious, Dag, why did you wait until you were like 32 to get started on becoming a lawyer? I guess you've described the case with the student paper before. I just wonder what your journey was from graduation with the 4 year degree to deciding to take the LSAT.
I actually took the LSAT fourth year in college, but I got wait-listed at William and Mary and didn't get into UVA. At the same time, my work as an intern at the Navy resulted in the navy developing a cost estimating system for environmental cleanup. A bunch of contractors offered me and the other guy who wrote the first version of the system jobs, saying that whoever had us would have a leg up in bidding.
We figured, if that's the case, we could just start our own company. So we did. And it worked - we grew for about 8 years pretty steadily.
It took about 10 years to get tired of it. The last year at the company, waiting to apply and get in to law school, was among the most miserable year of my life, career-wise. If not for Eve, I'm not sure how I would have survived it.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
If the defendants don't go quietly, break their legs.
Good luck.
PS, it looks like President Bush will be waiting a bit to pick the next Supreme Court judge. Does the President owe anyone out there a favor? I'd love to see Dag there.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just watching today, and a little research into some evidence issues.
Turns out my mentor is the community prosecutor, and is trying to implement scene-of-the-crime stay-away orders as a condition of release.
This happens to be the subject of the note I'm working on for my independent study/law review.
I did see some depressing stuff. For example, a first time offender plead guilty to two counts of misdemeanor possession rather than enter the first-offender program that would have kept his record clean.
I also got sworn in for third-year practice.
Next week I get to meet the woman who will convince the judge that her husband didn't mean to put her in the hospital. There's about one a week, apparently.
I've already met the guy who blew a .14% who only had 2 beers 2 hours ago.
The office is very supportive. Totally geared to getting me as much court time as possible, very helpful in general. It's worth the 60-mile drive each way.
But so far, I haven't done anything yet.
P.S., You'll be happy to know that the prosecutors take traffic offenses very seriously. Unfortunately, the judges don't always do so.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cool! Yes, educating judges is a key component of many state's traffic safety program. It's just appalling what judges think sometimes. This is especially true in small towns where the judge probably grew up thinking of the town drunk as an amusing local character, not a potential murderer.
But don't get me started.
It must be interesting seeing the mess people make of their lives.
I had a colleague say that many of the people in court for serious traffic offenses have simply failed Life 101. He didn't mean it in a pejorative sense, and I realize one needs to be careful when saying things like that. What he meant was that these are often people who just haven't figured how their world works. Somehow, they never grokked to the idea that it's just easier to obey the law. After a while, they just don't care because each new punishment is layered on top of others they can't cope with anyway. What's another fine I can't pay or a longer suspension when I'm suspended for 100 years+ already. But it starts with just not "getting it."
Also, getting someone on a DUI is really just attacking the symptom. The chances are they have a pretty serious substance abuse problem by the time they get picked up on a DUI (just the law of probabilities at work). Another way to fail Life 101 is, apparently, to drink through the class.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:What does this mean? That the person who is being tried must stay away from the crime scene, or everyone must? What is the purpose of that?
It means "the person who is being tried must stay away from the crime scene."
The purpose is to assist in cleaning up neighborhoods. The number one complaint people have with law enforcement efforts (by those not arrested), and the number one reason people don't report or testify, is that people who are arrested are back out on the street doing the same thing the next day.
Drug sales and prostitution tend to congregate at specific sites which vary over time but are fairly constant at any point in time. Making it harder to do that might not reduce crime, but it can lessen crime's corrosive impact on specific neighborhoods.
Actually catching someone selling drugs or soliciting is hard; looking at a list of photos and arresting those not allowed to be there is easier.
There are constitutional issues, but they are easy to meet if the program is run correctly.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
One thing that has impressed me greatly is how concerned the prosecutors are about the defendants.
For example, we had two prosecutors speak in class last night, and both mentioned the importance of not turning a misdemeanor or minor felony conviction into a life-ruining experience. Barring violence or a history of non-appearance, most support pre-trial release that allows someone to keep their job. They even usually support motions to serve jail sentences on weekends so jobs can be kept during sentencing.
They also cautioned about letting indigent circumstances affect decisions-making, with several concrete examples.
All in all, I've been very impressed with the consciousness the prosecutors have of their power and of the effect they can have on defendants' lives. The hard-core anti-criminal attitude is reserved mainly for violent offenders and repeat drunk drivers.
Next week I will try cases.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I've been in twice now.
One thing that has impressed me greatly is how concerned the prosecutors are about the defendants.
For example, we had two prosecutors speak in class last night, and both mentioned the importance of not turning a misdemeanor or minor felony conviction into a life-ruining experience. Barring violence or a history of non-appearance, most support pre-trial release that allows someone to keep their job. They even usually support motions to serve jail sentences on weekends so jobs can be kept during sentencing.
They also cautioned about letting indigent circumstances affect decisions-making, with several concrete examples.
All in all, I've been very impressed with the consciousness the prosecutors have of their power and of the effect they can have on defendants' lives. The hard-core anti-criminal attitude is reserved mainly for violent offenders and repeat drunk drivers.
Next week I will try cases.
That's actually something you rarely see on TV (not that TV should be the standard for anything ), where prosecutors are always "out to get him/her". It's nice to hear this. Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For what its worth I know someone who works for the Miami-Dade SAO who went from a C attorney to division chief in less than two years. I can't say that'll happen to you because turnover is so high down here and he already was working there in as the Bond Court attorney and he had experience up in Tampa, but still the oppurtunity to rise really quickly in the ranks if you keep with it is there when you're working for the state.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I missed trying cases last week - there was some snafu with paperwork.
But today I tried my first two cases, both misdemeanor domestic A&B (assault and battery).
For the first one, neither victim nor defendant showed. The "victim" swore out a warrant when his wife had an EPO served on him. Because the defendant had no criminal record and we thought the accusation was retalitory, we "noll prossed" (for "Nolle Prosequi", which means the state declares it will proceed no further).
The second case was a second offense that had been witnessed by the arresting officer. The defendant did not appear, but the victim did. Because there was no one to object, the police officer basically read her report, which included hearsay that probably wasn't admissible. In a bench trial, this isn't too bad, because the judge will disregard as appropriate. I made sure there was enough evidence that was admissible to support a verdict, and the witness confirmed all the hearsay. The defendant was convicted in his absence (he has an appeal of right for a new trial, so this isn't as bad as it sounds) and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest for sentencing.
Both these cases were trivial, given so I could practice the form in a low-risk environment with no real difficulties. They were supposed to be warm up for a third case. This guy violated an emergency protection order (EPO) and was terrorizing his wife. He needs to be in jail. I found out we could charge it as a felony because it was a third offense. So we noll prossed it and got a new warrant, and I won't get to try it. Still, I made a serious difference in this woman's life, and I'm happy about it.
Next week, I do misdemeanor appeals. Speeding (he's appealing a $30 fine, when the max he might face on appeal is $250 *shrug*), driving while suspended, habitual offender driving while suspended, and a possession case.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It makes me feel a bit better about life knowing that Dag's making a difference. Here's to a long career of it!
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, get warmed up for the big guns, cause when I get arrested for defenestrating my bosses, I'm calling you!!! :giggle:
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow Dag...this is interesting. So do you represent the S/state?
What I find interesting...and partly from hanging out with the goth and subculture community...is that ADD/ADHD is a huge factor in growing a smaller offense into a larger one...or at least a larger fine. ADHD people are not good at all with dates or scheduals at all. They don't show up, not because they don't care or are trying to piss off the government, but because they get distracted or stay up too late or forget. Do you guys take this into account? With the legilative branches taking more of a role in the judicial I suppose it's up to popular opinion... Anyway...what do you think?
[ September 27, 2005, 03:22 AM: Message edited by: Telperion the Silver ]
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: They don't show up, not because they don't care or are trying to piss off the government, but because they get distracted or stay up too late or forget. Do you guys take this into account?
I sincerely hope not.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Although we usually ask for detention for missed appearances, it's actually fairly rare to give additional jail time for contempt for a simple missed appearance. A history of no-shows will make it harder to get pretrial release in the future, and eventually they will get hammered by the judge for not appearing. But for non-violent fugitives, they usually don't throw the book entirely at them.
But, in general, they are accountable for their court date. Inability to appear is a reason to deny bond, and a history of not appearing is an even stronger reason to do so.
quote:Dag, get warmed up for the big guns, cause when I get arrested for defenestrating my bosses, I'm calling you!!! :giggle:
Once you're represented by a defenestrate attorney, I can't talk to you.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
The misdemeanor appeals I mentioned last time didn't happen. One guy got busted the night before in another town, and we didn't find out about it in time to have him transported. Two others didn't show, and one dropped his appeal at the last minute.
I did a couple bench trials in general district court that afternoon: One ended in a plea agreement.
This girl was driving and blew through a stop sign, almost hitting a cop. When she pulled over, she left the car in neutral and didn't put on the brake, so it rolled backwards into the cop. The girl gets out of the car and says, "I wasn't driving, he was." The guy she pointed to said, "I wasn't driving, I'm drunk off my ass." She had a suspended license (for failure to pay fines). We bargained the reckless for the parking brake to improper control and she pled on failure to obey a sign and driving while suspended. No big deal.
The second one was real. This guy was being tried for his 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th driving while suspended - all for failure to pay fines. He had -22 points on his license. Everything past the 2nd requires 10 days minimum.
Defense counsel tried to take advantage of my inexperience by objecting to the DMV transcript that showed his priors. The judge didn't even let me reply before overruling. He made quite the fool of himself - it was the talk of the office. He got 10 days on the charge I entered and pled out on the rest. He'll probably appeal it to circuit court. I hope to take it then, too.
Yesterday is when it got serious. Very serious. I did three bond hearings, including one to keep a very dangerous man detained until trial. I didn't get detention, but we're appealing that decision.
Finally, I was assigned my next case, one I'll be doing throughout the school year. It's a forcible sodomy of a 12-year old by an 18-year old. First step is to keep the guy in jail until trial on Monday.
This one has got me worked up a little. It's the exact kind of case that makes me want to be a prosecutor. But the stakes are huge - for the victim, for the defendant (max sentence is life), and for potential future victims. There's hints - nothing solid at all, jut intuition - that the parents of the defendant may have suspected his predatory behavior before.
This one is real. I'll be well supervised the whole way, but it's really up to me.
posted
Yikes is right. That's scary stuff. If you're anywhere near as reasonable and articulate as a lawyer as you are as a Hatracker, then I am confident you will do your job well.
While you're keeping the rest of the kids safe from the 18 year old, also keep in mind that your intuition that his parents suspected his behavior is also a BIG clue that either his parents or another close relative/family friend taught him the behavior. It might not be too late for rehab concurrent with lock-up.
Those sorts of cases are so sad and frightening.
Remember to take care of you and to keep your inner core of peace safe. You'll want it as you wade through cases like this . . .
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
I'm wondering if we can find anything out about this guys past.
Shan, bunbun is a great help in making sure I keep an inner core of peace. It's one of my main worries about this profession, the other being becoming jaded as I mentioned above. The big potential problem is that these can feed on each other. That also means that the right frame of mind can help keep both in check.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, it'd be hard for me to express the emotions your upcoming case stirs up in me for reasons both obvious and obscure...
But I wanted to say I don't think there's anyone else I know I'd rather have in charge of it. You have shown, from this distance, anyhow, a tremendous ability to mix compassion and understanding with firmness and fairness (might I say, "justice"?). I think that's essential in a case like this, where, as has been pointed out, the perpetrator may well also be a (salvageable) victim.
The sexual abuse case went to bond hearing on a day I wasn't there, so I didn't handle it. It'll be a month or two before anything else happens.
Today I had my first truly opposed trial. It was a bench trial, but I had three witnesses in my case-in-chief and I had to call rebuttal witnesses. It was a domestic assault and battery with an uncooperative, story-changing victim.
Fortunately, the guy who called the police was available to testify, so we could prove the assault without the victim's testimony.
It was also the first time I've had to use all those trial advocacy impeachment skills, and it was a relief to find out that I remembered them and they worked. It also helped that she didn't really appreciate the legal fine points, so the story she fabricated didn't actually get her boyfriend off the hook.
The defense attorney tried to squish the law in his closing, saying it was clear the victim never felt threatened and that the touching by the defendant wasn't offensive to her.
I had to write my rebuttal closing on the fly - 1.) offensiveness is measured at the time of the incident, and she actually hit the defendant to get him to release her from a bear hug; 2.) assault and battery does not require a perception of threat when a touching occurs; 3.) the witness's failure to directly intervene does not prove there was no assault, because the witness was concerned enough to follow the altercation for five blocks after calling the police.
Before I could get up to give it, though, the judge convicted the defendant.
One of the things Eve taught from her time clerking is that when the judge speaks when it's your turn, shut up. It's probably good news for you.
This was a "real" trial - very competent opposing counsel, some intricate rules of evidence issues, a contrary witness I needed to elicit information from, and a genuine issue of material fact that was resolved based on witness credibility and impeachment.
I wanted to thank the witness who called the police and followed the couple, but he took off before I got out of court. But seeing someone actually care about someone else like this was a welcome reminder that there are good citizens out there, even if we don't see them in our line of work very often.
All in all, it was a major milestone for me. My plans for getting a jury trial before the year is out are coming together. Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Seriously though, it's great to hear that not only are you good at it, but sounds like you enjoy it quite a lot. I know so many people who've slogged through law school and never use their degrees in a legal capacity. My final exam for law school ever is tomorrow, and I've learnt two things in the 4 years I've been here: 1) going to court is one of the last things I ever want to do, and 2) that's probably lucky, cos I probably wouldn't be that great at it. I'm about a bajillion times better at the research & writing side. Oh, and 3) I love insurance law.
...
Yeah, yeah, insurance.
Anyway, I hope you continue to enjoy your career, Mr Prosecutor, sir! Posts: 1431 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Well, someone has to. One thing I like about law is how many different personality types can be happy in it. I can't particularly understand the enjoyment from transactional work, but I know many people who think litigation would be suitable for the second level of hell.
Last week, I watched a murder trial. Some guys had beaten up the defendant's brother, and the defendant was trying to get a one on one fight between the victim and his brother. The victim turned away, and the defendant shot him.
There were 5 eyewitnesses, including the defendant's friend. The defendant's friend had agreed to testify, then he got picked up for sellin cocaine. When he testified, he was in jail-issue orange and shackled.
The prosecutor refused to give him a deal, but he testified anyway (I assume to have something good to say at sentencing). The defense attorney went through a standard impeachment of the guy.
D: You don't expect to get any special treatment for testifying? W: No. D: You're hear out of the goodness of your heart? W: Something like that.
When the defense lawyer was done, the deputy motioned the witness back to detention. He went halfway, then walked back to the microphone, pulled it up to his mouth, and said, "You need to tighten your game, man."
I had to bite my fist to keep from laughing.
During a recess, whispers started going through the packed courtroom. "Fight? where's a fight?" The courtroom emptied out. One of the witnesses was fighting another one and tried to bite her ear off.
I stayed inside during the fight, next to the large man in the brown uniform with the big gun.
The defense attorney switched from the some other guy defense to self-defense mid-stream (almost always a mistake). When the defendant testified on direct, he said, "So I thought he was going to go get his heater." The lawyer interrupted: "By heater you mean?" "A burner," said the defendant. "A burner?" asked the lawyer. "A gun, fool. A gun."
The defense case, such as it was, crumbled when the prosecutor played a tape of the guy talking to his girlfriend from jail: "I ain't got no defense. I got no f&^%ing defense."
The jury took an hour to find guilt, and then an hour to give a life sentence. The judge can lower that, but probably won't. The defendant had 9 prior felonies, including 3 violent ones.
posted
I haven't done a lot of trials lately: everything's getting pled out or continued for some reason.
The most difficult thing I've had to do so far is probation violations. About noon, one of the senior staff prosecutors told me I was doing probabtion violations at 2:00. I've never done one, never seen one. That wasn't what was difficult, I got to watch about 3 before I had to go.
First case: woman disappeared in 2004 from supervised probation for larceny and drug possession. Turns out she went to Colorado. Her story is that she got clean, left an abusive fiance, and finished a year and a half of college. She got engaged, found out she was pregnant, and came back to clear up her probation. While in Colorado, she was arrested for filing a false police report and pled guilty.
However, we have no evidence of any of this. I had the existing flight from probation and the false report to impeach her with. We also have some pretty strict standards on people who flee supervised probation. I asked for, and got, 8 months in jail. Her baby is due right before she gets out, assuming she was telling the truth. I was annoyed as hell at the defense attorney. Had he gotten one shred of corroborating evidence the judge would have probably lowered the sentence significantly.
The second case was a woman on probation for shoplifiting. She had supervised probation and a general order of good behavior. She was arrested for felony larceny shoplifting and failed four separate drug tests. On the stand she lied about the drug tests and her story was not consistent. I asked for, and got, the balance of here sentence, 11 months I think (far more time than she got for the felony larceny). On the stand, she testified that she had an autistic son and that she was the only one who could care for him.
I feel bad for both, but only a little. There has GOT to be severe punishments for probation or the whole system breaks down. Their probation was their second chance (the first being the chance not to commit a crime at all). Without sanctions backing up the probation, most people would not complete it. I feel bad that a baby will be born in the jail hospital. I hope she was telling the truth about getting clean and I hope she manages to get back on that track after her sentence. I feel bad that an autistic boy doesn't have his mother around. But if she cared that much about her son...
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
If you ever start thinking of it as "no big deal," it will be time to find a new job.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Go get'em!!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
