When You Try To Help A Cop And...

He is a total jerk.

I was driving down a dark highway in Cypress when I noticed a bunch of flashing emergency lights.  I slowed down, but I couldn't tell if the center lane was open, and I have bright Xenon headlights.   As I get close to the flashing lights I see some flashlights.  It was two cops.  They were telling me to turn around.

I kindly say, "Officer, I think the Sheriff's car in the center lane needs to be parked in the lane like the others, not parallel. I could not see the car at all."

Cop replies,  "We're just a a bunch of dumb ass cops.  Get the hell out of here!"

What prick.

All I was trying to do was keep the officer's safe, their cars safe, and the public safe.

Cops, if you can't handle the stress of your job, make the world a safer place and quite.

Assault Family Violence Case Dismissed

While I'm in the groove, I might as well share my latest dismissal with you.   I don't want to get into the details, but the allegations are that it starts with your typical booze-filled evening and ends with a few hits to the face of the driver.  While the car was moving.

The complainant, which is the legally accurate term for a "victim,"  pulls off the highways.  Client allegedly take the car keys and chunks them over a fence.  Complainant flags down officers who slap cuffs on my client and throw her in the slammer, and leave her there for WAY TOO LONG.

So, this is your typical misdemeanor assault case.  There are some relatively bad allegations, o independent witnesses, no eye witnesses, and bad presumptively bad police work.  

What does a criminal defense lawyer do in this scenario.  First, I have a thorough interview with my client at my office, which sometimes includes a scene reenactment so I can see first hand, as good as possible, what went down.   Next, I get and review the offense report.  I don't just skim it an make a recommendation like many lawyers.  I go through with a fine tomb comb.  No mistake, error, or misstatement is to small to matter, at least not as a starting point.  Next, I reach out to the complainant and attempt to speak to him or her.  

If possible, I will get a sworn affidavit recounting the events. Why go through the trouble of getting a sworn affidavit?  Well, the rules of evidence determine how a case can be tried.  A sworn affidavit is made under oath and threat of perjury.  That means that if the person lies under oath when giving the affidavit, that person may be subject to criminal charges for perjury.  The promise to tell the truth and threat of criminal charges makes the document more credible.  Finally, if the witness gets on the stand and testifies differently, I am able to impeach the witness.  What does it mean to impeach a witness?  Impeaching a witness is attacking the credibility of a witness.  Being able to properly impeach a witness is a very important skill that most lawyers do not actually know how to do. Properly.   I do plenty more than this when preparing for a case, but I will leave it here for now.

The good news is that my client's case was dismissed, and she can move on with her life, which includes getting an expunction and clearing her record.

The Ballad of Marijuana Defendant

The Dope Defense Attorney

This case has become unreal.  Just unreal. My client was charged with possession of marijuana.  I don't want to give away too much here because I know the prosecutor, who I believe to be lovely and reasonable in her soul, has at the very least looked up body cameras in the local news.  In fact, I think she was kind of impressed that I was quoted in the Houston Chronicle about this particular case. 

Note:  The Pic Is Not Me Or My Client

Credit where credit is due.  She researched the matter, and dare I say me (although I doubt it), and then tried to get any reference to the article excluded from trial through a motion in limine.  

So, just why has this case become unreal.  Harris County Court 14 works in a peculiar way.  Clients only have three or four court dates, spread out over about 6-9 months before their first trial setting.   Personally, I like this set up.  Your client doesn't get pointlessly dragged into court, and I don't find going to court every month for the same case a useful exercise for attorneys either.  In theory, there should be more cases being dismissed in Court 14, and also more cases going to trial due to the scheduling.  The problem is that cases are not actually being dismissed at the rate they should be.

Well I can tell you what, a whole ton of cases are set for trial in that Honorable Court everyday. While I'm not important enough for court staff to read my blog, I still take a risk by saying that showing up for trial TEN TIMES is inexcusable. It is a war of attrition to get the defendant to plead guilty by tearing away at their finances, will power, and soul.  

My client is innocent and she will not plead guilty for something she did not do.  Hell, there are defendants who may be guilty that want to go to trial, but feel like the government can't make there case, and that is their constitutional right.

Back to the topic.  At my client's 9th trial setting, yes ninth, my client was told to return the next day (third day in a row), only if the judge called her case to trial.  In other words, she didn't have to be at court like the rest of the defendants.  So, I showed up in her stead. Judge Fields, who is truly a likable and well thought judge, calls my client's case to trial.

Ok, so I don't announce that I am ready.  I don't have witnesses and I don't have my co-counsel with me at that exact moment.  The was kind enough to say,  "Counselor, you are great.  You know what you are doing and know the facts of your case very well.  You don't need co-counsel.  You don't even need to go get your file."  As flattering as his statement may be,  commercial pilots don't fly solo, and neither do I.  He reaffirms that my case is going to trial, so I run outside and call my client.   Like the rest of Houston, she had trouble getting downtown in the tail end of a tropical storm.  Too much trouble.

Meanwhile, we have a GREAT jury panel.  I am talking about young and diverse.  It was a beautiful thing.  Two hours later, the judge tells the jury to go home. Judge Fields even proclaimed he had never seen such a good looking jury for the defense and jokingly said he wanted to take a picture with them. The times, they are a changing.  However, My client finally arrives and Judge Fields graciously and justly did not revoke my client's bond because she had been on time the previous 9 trial settings. 

I was so ready to try this case.  Witnesses would have been great, but I won a good couple of battles during pretrial motions, not least including getting a spoliation instruction granted, should I present evidence warranting the instruction, which was likely to happen.  I saw Mike DeGuerin in the elevator and got some words of advice from that legend, and I had some great attorney''s helping me at trial.  The stars were aligning.  It's a shame my client wasn't on time.  

Lesson learned, don't give your client's the chance to mess things up, because they will, and at the worse of times.

The Life of Young Criminal Defense Lawyer

It sucks.  Sometimes.  Well, most of the time.  One second you are driving to court in a tropical storm in you 1999 Miata, roof somewhat secured.  The next millisecond, your roof flies off, your arms nearly goes with with it, and you are surprised at how well your car handles under those conditions.

Before (sorta)

After

"1999 Mazda Miata?! Yeah right!  You're a lawyer!  You're rich!"  No.  No, I am, not.  You see, I try to charge prices that are fair for me and fair for my clients.  The prices I try to charge won't make me rich.  The problem with this game is that my potential clients are always lying to me about their ability to pay, and there is always some asshole skeezbag baby lawyer or older lawyer undercutting me.

It's a fucking race to the bottom 'round here.

Let's talk about one of those skeezbag lawyers for a second.  This particular young lawyer does not appear to do any of his own work.  Anytime he has a question, he asks it on the listserve.  It's as if he has no idea what he's doing, and even worse, he has no idea how to find the answers for himself and be a real fucking lawyer.  The sad thing, the sad thing is that all the numbnuts on the listserve are praising him as some sort of great lawyer.

Let me ask you this, my friends.  How in the WORLD does this baby lawyer who just started his own practice have so many fucking clients?!  Not just clients, but client's already in jail?  Clients just getting out of jail?  Felony clients?  There is only ONE fucking way, and its that he's up to some shady shit, other than wearing fucking jeans to court every day.  Not even nice jeans.  This guy has an inside man.  Someone inside jail and prison getting him clients.  FTMF.

For the record, I think he has been licensed two years but just started criminal defense.  Also,  I used to smash his fiance.

So, back to what I intended to write about.  The type of shit that directly effects me, other than the undercutting skeezbags in the profession.  But before I get there, it's sad that your success rate doesn't necessarily determine your income.

So, I represent a girl charged with prostitution.  Apparently every girl between 17-25 who is charged with prostitution is assigned a special SAFE court prosecutor.  My particular girl was a suspected victim of human trafficking.  So the big problem with SAFE court is that it exists only in Court 7, but the girls are not all assigned to court 7.  In fact, probably 90% of the girls are assigned to the other 14 Harris County Courts.  But wait, there's more.  It get's worse.  There is only one prosecutor that handles all these cases.  Mind you, that Houston is the human trafficking capital of the United States, and one of the prostitution capitals of the world.  ONE FUCKING PROSECUTOR.   But wait, there's more!  The courts on on different floors, and the elevators in the courthouse are horrible.

So if that nonsense isn't enough NO ONE KNOWS FUCKING ANYTHING ABOUT SAFE COURT.  The normal prosecutors know absolutely nothing.  But, I mean, of course the ACT like the know everything!  All they know how to do is hand you a blue pamphlete and misdirect you.   Let's continue.  The court coordinators know nothing.  The probation officers know nothing.  The judges probably know nothing.

So let's think about this.  There is one prosecutor, 14 courts, 5 floors of courts, and dozens of clients each day.  The OBVIOUS SIMPLE SOLUTION is assign all girls charged with prostitution to the freaking prostitution court.  But that would be to easy.  Well, let's think about this.  Maybe the prosecutor would go to the oldest case first.  Nope, can't do that.

So, my client was charged 6 months ago.  We have been to court 6 times.  Each time, has been a pain in the ass.  First the case with with human trafficking.  Then it was transferred to the proseuctors of the court it was actually in.  And back and forth over and over again.  So finally, my girl gets in to the SAFE program which requires her to take an eligibility interview.

So, I arrange the interview, my client shows up on time and does what she needs to do.  Which brings us to my last court setting on this case.  I am not stupid or niave.  I don't show up early.  So I show up when I show up, around 9 930.  My client shows up at 8 when she is supposed to.  I arrive and check in to see if the human trafficking prostitutor had arrived.  Naturally, she hadn't, so I email her.  Or at least the prosecutor from the last 5 times.  You see, these pains in the ass at the district attorney rotate all the fucking time.  So there was a new prosecutor on the case.  Does anyone care to tell me that? No.  Does any one care to let me know how my client did at the interview?  No.

So when I find out who the new prostitutor is, I email her.  I kindly let her know we're in court waiting, and to email me when she arrives.  She tells me she is in court 4, and will be up soon.  I email back saying thank you.  An hour and a half later I email her again.

This is the exact email.

I really can't wait two-three hours every time I have a "human trafficking" case.  This case is six months old and its been played like a yo-yo. I have literally waited over 10 hours just for prosecutors to show up to court. This is beyond disrespectful to both me and my client. 

 This email is not an exaggeration.   Meanwhile, I am across the hall doing some recognizance for an upcoming trial.  When I cross the hall to go back to the court where my alleged prostitute is, I see the human trafficking prosecutor talking to one of her 'girlfriends' all casual and shit in the hallway, while I have been WAITING FOR OVER TWO FUCKING HOURS!

She walks into court a few MINUTES later and sits at counsel table.  Defense counsel table.  She plops down in a big leather chair, then swings around, turning AWAY from me.  So I say "good morning, can we please get to work on this case?"  She swings around like like a bat out of hell and at the top of her lungs, like all female prosecutors, says, "That was the nastiest, rudest thing any defense lawyer has ever said to me!  You don't know me.  You have never done any work with me.  You are completely ridiclous.....blah blah blah."  The second I open my mouth to defense myself to say I have been waiting over two hours she bitches about her job.  I suggest that she be a little repsectful and try to resolve old cases first.  At this point gaggle of geese co-prosecutors who are the normal prosecutors in this particular court jump in and gang up on me.

They were so effective that a defense attorney jumped in and started patronizing me.  To her I said, "You are a court appointed lawyer, basically one of them.  Don't talk to me."  She said no I'm not and tried to talk me down for 10 minutes.  I looked this prosecutor up.  She is one of the top 20 attorneys in the county.. in the sense that she is plea mill lawyer of the day extraordinare.  To her credit, when I showed her the nasty rude email I sent to dea prostitutor she spoke to the the prostitutor.

So, finally to the business.   The prostitutor tells me, "You're client did not go to the interview.  She didn't do what she's supposed to do.  She's not getting in the program."   To which I called out her lie and said, "See, I was right,  you have not worked on this case at all."  She steps outside comes back a few minutes later, without appolizing for lying, which is the least she could do and also the least likely thing she could do, and tells me ok your client has her orientation on whatever date.

It sucks being a young criminal defense attorney at times.  It doesn't matter if your dismissal rate is way above average.  It doesn't matter if you win all your trials and hearings such as I have.  It doesn't matter if your clients are all happy.  One day I will figure it out.

FIFA! CORRUPT? THE FEDS, RICO, RATS, SNITCHES, AND INDICTMENTS

FIFA IS CORRUPT! 

14 INDICTMENTS UNSEALED!

WHO REMAINS?

Ideas:

1. How does the U.S. D.O.J. have jurisdiction?
2. What is RICO?
3. Do we know who all the rats are?
4. Rackateering
5. Wirefraud
6. Money Laundering
7. Indictment against Daryan signed by Loretta Lynch

Finally.  It has happened.  The American Feds have indicted and arrested 14 FIFA officials.  IN SWITZERLAND!

My bet is that Sepp Blatter has been indicted.  The only reason he was not arrested and the indictment unsealed is because he is a Swiss national, and Switzerland does not extradite its own citizens. 

My other bet is that the rats and snitches, such as Chuck Blazer, are ratting on Sepp Blatter so that theu can live out the rest of their lives in Trump Tower where they hide their stashes of cash.

I have another hunch.  I have a feeling that Sunil Gulati, the President of U.S. Soccer.

"These defendants took the soccer enterprise and turned it into a criminal enterprise."  

As a criminal defense lawyer that practices soccer law, I am familiar with FIFA.  I will write more soon.

Unlawful Carrying Of A Weapon Motion To Suppress Post-Rodriguez

I was almost there.  I was so close that I could feel it.  I could touch it.  I could see it.  I could see the Montgomery County Judge saying, "Motion To Suppress Granted," and the State of Texas saying "Judge we will file this Motion to Dismiss."  However, it wasn't to be.  It wasn't to be because we worked the case us so good that the Montgomery County prosecutor dismissed both cases in exchange for my client forfeiting his handgun.

For the record, I would not have taken that deal under the circumstances, that's how confident I was in the facts of the case, my legal research, and that I would not let the government steal my gun (if I had one).  However, as a client-centered lawyer, my job, my obligation is to inform my clients about the procedure, the potential courses of action, and the potential consequences of each course of action.  In this case, the dismissals were all he wanted.

So, let's rewind to May of 2014, in a little speed-trap of a town called Patton Village.  My client was driving a car his mother bought him for graduation north on highway 59 to visit his mother in Mississippi.  He was traveling in the left lane, allegedly, without passing other vehicles.  A Patton Village Cop followed him for, according to the cop, three miles.  The cop turns on his dashboard camera as the cars approach the Liberty County Line (where liberty goes to die).  In the video, you can see that my client's car is getting further from the white car in the right hand lane, and closer to the semi in front of him, thus appearing to be passing traffic and nullifying the reason for the stop.

The officer turns on his overhead emergency lights and pulls my client over.  My client turns on his signal and makes safe lane changes until he comes to a safe stop on the shoulder, at which point he turns on his hazard lights.  The Patton Village Cop calls in my client's Mississippi license plate number, exits his vehicle and goes to the driver door.  The cop talks to my African American client for a full minute with his window down.  My client gives the cop his license, insurance and registration, just as he's supposed to, and the cop orders my client out of the car.  The cop waits for a another cop to arrive (not in the offense report as it should be) then returns to the squad car and runs my client's driver license. 

About 15 minutes later, the cop learns that there are no arrest warrants for my client, he has no criminal history, he has only been pulled over once before, and that his car is coming back as stolen.  The cop places my client under arrest and puts him in the back of the squad car.  My client tells the officer that there must be a mistake, I mean, after all, the his registration and insurance are for that car, they have his name on it along with his mother's name, who shares the same last name and is registered to her address in Mississippi which is the address on my client's driver's license.

The officer agrees to call my client's mother.  To be fair, he could have been a real big jerk and not done that, but on the other side of the token, the evidence before him was that the car was not stolen.  His story made sense.  So, the cop calls my client's mother who answers.  The cop says hes in a stolen car.  She asks what he's driving.  She cuts him off,  "is it a black 2006 chevy hhr?"  Indeed it was.  She assures the cop that the car was not stolen.  The cop sayd he would let her son go in a few moments.

The cop then tells my client he is letting him go, but requests consent to search his vehicle.  My client exercises his Fourth Amendment right to deny the officer consent to search.  At this point, under a new Supreme Court Case called Rodriguez v. United States, the cop had a duty to let my client go.  Instead, the cop called a K9 to search the outside of my client's car.  The K9 arrives 15 minutes later (after more than an hour had already passed where the officer could have called the K9, or actually just searched the car since he had probable cause to believe a crime had been committed).  The K9 made two hits, and the cops recovered some weed and pistol.

We argued that the fruit of the search, were fruits of the poisonous tree, and must be suppressed.  In layman's terms, the cops illegally searched my client's car.

So quick rundown on searches and seizures.  A cop can search a person or a place if there is a valid search warrant.  IF there is not a valid search warrant, the search is presumed to be unlawful.  An officer can search for contraband if he has probable cause."  Probable cause is exists where facts and circumstances are sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts (that a person committed a crime) are probably true.  Probable cause to search exists if the cop sees the person commit the crime, the contraband is in plain view, the officer's smells the weed... so on and so forth.

Here, the cop did not see and dope in plain view. The law holds that an officer must diligently pursue all reasonable avenues to confirm or dispel a belief, and that they must execute the ordinary tasks of a traffic stop in a diligent manner.  So, an officer may not prolong a traffic stop to call a dog or conduct a search without probable cause. 

What are the ordinary tasks of a traffic stop, you may ask?  Investigating and issuing a ticket, running a warrant check to see if the driver if the driver is wanted for arrest, and do a license plate check to see if the car is stolen.  In this case, the officer did a reasonable diligent job in doing the above, and he did a pretty great job at investigating once the car was stolen.  However, once he determined the car was stolen, he did not have the right to detain my client any longer, unless he had developed a reasonable suspicion to believe my client was engaged in or was about to be engaged in criminal activity. FYI, all you officers out there, a HUNCH IS NOT ENOUGH TO DETAIN A MOTORIST!!!  

In this case, the officer did not have an articulable  reasonable suspicion to continue detaining my client and it was his right, as it is yours, dear reader, to DENY CONSENT TO SEARCH his vehicle.  My client did not make incriminating statement, there was nothing in plain view, the car was not stolen, he was not a known drug dealer, he did not come from a known drug house, he was not intoxicated, his story made sense, he was calm, cooperative, honest, did not attempt to flee... I could continue, but you get the point.

There are a litany of cases that define what a cop can and cannot do in regard to a traffic stop.  Rodriguez is great because it affirms absent a reasonable suspicion, the extension of a traffic stop a.k.a. prolonged detention is an unreasonable seizure, and that calling a K9 is not an ordinary or traditional aspect of a traffic stop.

If you have been arrested you need to hire a lawyer who loves to investigate unlawful searches and seizures.  You need a lawyer who can read an offense report and smell something fishy.  You need a lawyer who enjoys researching to protect your liberties.  

HOW DO YOU DEFEND THOSE PEOPLE? REFLECTIONS ON THE CONSTITUTION

I just returned from a trip to our nation's capitol.  I went to D.C. for the Anti-Defamation League Glass Leadership Institute Summit.  The Anti-Defamation League is a nongovernmental organization that fights against hate and for civil rights.  

The trip was amazing.  I attended several panels, asked pressing questions of the associate director of the FBI for terrorism, and someone in a similar position in the White House. I met Senator Cory Booker and saw John McCain speak.  I also had the opportunity to do a lot of walking and a lot of touring. 

I saw four things that were extremely moving:  The Declaration of Independence, United States Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and the flag that inspired the Star-Spangled Banner.

Over the course of my weekend in D.C. I was asked many times, "How do you do it?  How do you defend criminals?  How do you defend people you know are guilty?"  In fact, I have been asked these questions ever since I began practicing criminal law.  Those four pieces of American History are the lights that guide me to represent those accused among us.  My response to these questions is always that if my client is not free, if my client is not guaranteed all of his rights under the Constitution, if my client if not treated how you would expect to be treated if you were in his position, you are not free, you will not have those rights and protections, and you will be treated no better than him.

Clarence Darrow said it best, if you are not free, I am not free.

One of my clients will be charged with Intoxicated Manslaughter.  One of my mentors asked me if I'll take the case, and I told him that I'm not sure if I can because a childhood friend of mine was recently killed by a drunk driver.  My mentor, Eric Davis, stopped me in my tracks and reminded me what I told all my new friends this weekend: It is so important to protect the Constitution, and my client trusts me with his life, and I owe it to him, and everyone out there, to repay that trust.

God Bless America