Brown & Little, P.L.C. » Entries tagged with "prosecutor"
Abusing Science
The government loves science. It should be quite obvious why, as science can very easily be twisted to serve the state’s nefarious purposes while maintaining the illusion of being undeniable and absolute. Science is the smoking gun in many cases, regardless of whether it really is or not. DUI cases in particular are often built on nothing more than government pseudo-science, something without which the state would only be able to prove in many instances that defendants were bad drivers who did a poor job performing parlor tricks for a cop. The results of a supposedly scientific test can instantaneously change a minor civil traffic ticket into a DUI conviction along with all of the accompanying social stigma and various draconian punishments. Most lawyers and judges are … Read entire article »
Filed under: Courts, DUI, Government Rants
This Ain’t Texas
D.A. Confidential put up a post yesterday about the role of a judge and the widely held belief among criminal defendants that speaking to the judge might somehow help their case. The judge he appears in front of apparently gives a speech instead of taking a side in plea negotiations. D.A. Confidential concludes his post with these words: A long docket this morning, and I bet at least one inmate will ask to speak to the judge, hoping he’ll sweeten the deal and take the defendant’s side in plea negotiations. The judge won’t, of course, he’ll give his usual speech. But think about it the other way around. Imagine if the judge weighed in on our side, pressured the defendant to take our deal. That possibility, I trust, makes it … Read entire article »
Filed under: Clients, Courts, Prosecutors
The Makings of a Great Tragedy
I once received very wise advice to take caution when writing about things close to home. I took it to heart. Years of being told “don’t shit where you eat” didn’t sink in, I guess, but that more subtle, specific advice did. Things far away aren’t so clear, however, so they may be a different story. Circumspection be damned? If I lived in Texas, I would have had a little more background when I read this post by Murray Newman. I was skeptical about what he perceived as a double standard even reading it without context, but that by itself didn’t seem worth a post on my part. When a prosecutor gets charged and defense lawyers don’t just rant about the presumption of innocence, I … Read entire article »
Filed under: DUI, Practice in General, Prosecutors
Case against DeCosta Dismissed
The case against David DeCosta has been dismissed. Here is the story, and here is the minute entry. I haven’t seen the state’s motion to dismiss, but Arizona Criminal Attorney Russ Richelsoph tells me the state moved to dismiss without prejudice because there was “no reasonable likelihood of conviction.” I summarized the facts of the case here, but Mark Bennett explained it best: DeCosta was set up by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and the Phoenix Police Department, and he was almost certainly factually innocent. When I found out the criminal case against DeCosta was dismissed, my first thought was “it’s about damn time.” My second thought was “what’s he going to do now?” In my daily practice, I see how destructive criminal charges can be. I … Read entire article »
Filed under: Uncategorized
A Tricky Situation
Article 2, Section 22 of the Arizona Constitution says that “[a]ll persons charged with crime shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except . . . [f]or felony offenses committed when the person charged is already admitted to bail on a separate felony charge and where the proof is evident or the presumption great as to the present charge.” Knowing that, what do you say when you know your client’s new offense was allegedly committed while he was out on bond for another felony offense and the judge asks, “counsel, do you have any recommendations regarding bond?” Does it matter if the same judge is assigned to the client’s other case and presumably knows that the client was out on bail when he or she supposedly committed the new offense? … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Constitution, Clients, Courts, Ethics, Practice in General, Professionalism, Prosecutors
Mandatory Minimums, Maximums
Arizona’s sentencing statutes contain ranges of permissible prison sentences for different classes of felonies. Defendants with historical prior felony convictions face ranges with longer minimum and maximum sentences. If a defendant has more than two historical priors, the additional priors may be considered aggravating factors which merit a longer sentence within the statutory range, but there aren’t any special statutory sentencing ranges for people with three, four, or five historical priors. Usually, the most a judge can give someone with two historical priors will be the same as what the judge can give someone with three or more historical priors. Prosecutors regularly get that wrong. I recently had a prosecutor argue that my client, who had a ton of historical priors and was charged with a class two felony, … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Statutes, Practice in General, Prosecutors
Discovery Fees
Some Arizona prosecuting agencies charge defense attorneys for copies of police reports and other discovery. For instance, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office charges $0.25 per page. They have you sign an invoice when you pick up the discovery, then they send you a bill. Most Maricopa County defense attorneys I know have at least one delinquent discovery bill from the county attorney sitting around their office. There’s not much point in writing a check for a dollar or two. A friend of mine told me about a defense attorney who was 90 days delinquent on a bill for $1.50 and wanted to go to the county attorney with $0.55 and ask to be put on a payment plan for the remainder. I don’t like the county … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Constitution, Procedural Rules, Prosecutors
Worst. Plea. Ever.
Until last September, if you were convicted of extreme DUI in Arizona, you would have to do thirty days in jail, all but ten of which could be suspended. Now, you must do the full thirty days. On top of that, if you’ve had another DUI within the past seven years, you are looking at a whopping 120 days of jail. None of it can be suspended. I recently had a client who got a DUI just before the law changed and had a prior DUI slightly over seven years old. By “slightly” I mean a matter of days. Because of the date of the offense, hers was a typical extreme DUI. No special enhancements applied, and neither did the crazy new law. Based … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Statutes, DUI, Prosecutors
Recent Comments