Posts tagged with: "right to counsel"
Results 1 - 20 of 267
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Feb 2013, 12:48 pm by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Been asked this so here goes. Does the new statute require tribes to guarantee counsel to indigent defendants in special tribal domestic violence prosecutions of non-Indians? Yes, the answer is (as Yoda would say) (and assuming President Obama doesn’t veto). Here is the new statute, of which section 904(d) reads: In a criminal proceeding in which a participating tribe exercises special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction, the participating tribe shall provide to the defendant— (1)… [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 6:09 pm by Thomas Gallagher
In Minnesota, a person arrested on a police officer’s suspicion of DWI has the legal right to consult a lawyer prior to responding to a request by police to consent to chemical testing.  A problem often arises due to the fact that most of these situations happen in the late night or early morning hours when most people – and most lawyers – are asleep.  Most people who find themselves in this unwelcome circumstance never believed they would be, and may not know a criminal lawyer or DWI… [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 9:38 am
As this blog has often pointed out (see here and here), the investigation and prosecution of lawyers for their lawyering is different.  Because these cases carry the potential to chill creative and zealous advocacy, they merit special precautions and scrutiny.  In fact, the ABA includes several recommendations in its "Standards on Prosecutorial Investigations" on how defense counsel should be prosecuted, including noting that "the prosecutor’s office should protect against the use of false… [read post]
9 Aug 2009, 8:41 am
According to recent news reports on press releases from Minneapolis police; local and federal law enforcement have arrested at least one suspect and executed search warrants - yielding a database of subscribers to My Fast Pass, apparently in connection with claimed criminal prostitution. An interesting twist in this case, police have publicly declared: "As part of our ongoing criminal investigation, it is our intention to have face to face contact with people on this list, to include men and women.… [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 10:24 pm
Throwing out the convictions of Robert Simels’ associate for witness tampering among other charges, EDNY Judge Gleeson found in United States v. Irving, 2010 WL 430952 (E.D.N.Y. February 8, 2010), that there was insufficient evidence to support the “sizable inferential leap[s]” necessary to find the associate knew of Simels’ “hair-raisingly criminal” plans.  The case, previously discussed here and here, is notable because of what it says (and doesn’t say) about “mere association”… [read post]
9 Apr 2013, 4:03 pm by jleaming@acslaw.org
by Jeremy Leaming It’s been 50 years since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to counsel even if they cannot afford it. But too many states have not lived up to their constitutional obligation of ensuring that indigent defendants have counsel, helping lead to mass incarceration. A new report from the Brennan Center For Justice explains that the states’ woefully ineffective handling of indigent defense cases has led to mass incarceration that… [read post]
21 Aug 2009, 1:29 pm
Behind the convictions of criminal defense lawyers Robert Simels and Arienne Irving yesterday on charges of witness tampering and obstruction of justice is a profound question: should there be different rules for the prosecution of lawyers? The Simels prosecutors thought yes, and drafted a unique protocol for the minimization of communications intercepted under a Title III warrant. EDNY Judge Gleeson disagreed. In United States v. Simels, 2009 WL 1924746 (E.D.N.Y. July 2, 2009), he suppressed the… [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 1:34 am by Lauren E. Koster
We have all heard at one time or another, whether in a movie or television show, a police officer inform a person of their right to have a lawyer appointed to them if they cannot afford one. As a general rule, the assistance of appointed counsel guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment for criminal matters, applies to civil proceedings, only if the defendant’s personal liberty is at stake (i.e., the penalty could result in incarceration). The question of whether parties are entitled to appointed… [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 3:30 pm by The Law Office of Nancy King
In recent posts we've covered separately Miranda rights and California DUI law. It's important to be aware, however, how Miranda applies to DUI, including some important limitations. People often ask these questions: "When I was arrested for DUI, the officer did not read me my Miranda rights. Isn't that a violation of police procedure? Doesn't that somehow compromise the prosecution's case?" The answers to those questions are usually no and no. Here's why. Your Miranda rights are the… [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 9:18 am by Editor
NinthCircuit.James R Browning Courthouse.jpg Ninth Circuit considers whether the testimony of former defense counsel at a sentencing hearing on loss and restitution issues violated the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the attorney-client privilege, in United States v. Stargell, _ F.3d _ (9th Cir. Oct. 17, 2013) (No. 11–50392) Read more [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 5:56 am by zshapiro
Jerome Bass was convicted of cocaine related charges in the Federal District Court for the State of Nebraska. He appealed and lost. He then filed a writ of habeas corpus alleging incompetence of counsel. He claimed that his trial counsel failed to make an in limine motion objecting the testimony of one witness, failed to object to the testimony of a second witness, and failed to object to the U. S. attorney’s vouching for a witness during closing. A defendant in a criminal trial not only has… [read post]
24 Feb 2013, 4:01 pm by legalinformatics
Colin Lachance, Esq., of CanLII has an interesting new post discussing how Internet dissemination of court decisions is increasing the influence of those decisions, and may have implications for the doctrine of Stare decisis: Disrupting Stare Decisis – a.k.a. I can has internets? Slaw.ca. Here is an excerpt: Throughout the internet age, and across multiple domains, we have seen many examples of disruptions to longstanding traditions and to once commonly-held beliefs of propriety. Can Stare… [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 3:03 pm by The Law Office of Nancy King
The Miranda warning is an element of the criminal justice system that through TV and movies has become widely recognized among Americans. This warning, which springs from the U.S. Supreme Court's 1966 decision in Miranda v. Arizona, is meant to ensure that citizens understand their constitutional rights if they are arrested and subjected to interrogation by law enforcement. Supreme Court decisions during the past year, however, have placed important restrictions on the scope of the Miranda… [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 10:11 am by Lewis Gainor
Everyone has seen it on TV. When a person gets arrested, the police read him his rights. Only a rule this simple could cause so much confusion among people who have been arrested. The rights everyone is referring to are those provided by the Supreme Court in the Miranda decision. Miranda was a defendant in Arizona who gave a confession and was later convicted of the rape and kidnapping of an 18-year old girl. The Supreme Court threw out the conviction and established a rule that a suspect must be… [read post]
18 Mar 2013, 6:26 am by davidharrisauthor
March 18 marks the 5oth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gideon v. Wainwright.  The Gideon case requires that if person charged with a felony wants the assistance of a lawyer but cannot afford one, the state must provide a lawyer at no charge.  The Court based its decision on the Sixth Amendment‘s guarantee of the right to the assistance of counsel.  When facing felony criminal charges that could result in prison, the Court said, lawyers were… [read post]
18 Mar 2013, 6:26 am by davidharrisauthor
March 18 marks the 5oth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gideon v. Wainwright.  The Gideon case requires that if person charged with a felony wants the assistance of a lawyer but cannot afford one, the state must provide a lawyer at no charge.  The Court based its decision on the Sixth Amendment‘s guarantee of the right to the assistance of counsel.  When facing felony criminal charges that could result in prison, the Court said, lawyers were… [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 1:09 pm
Thanks to Hollywood and TV crime dramas, almost anyone can recite the standard Miranda warning, "you have the right to remain silent..." However, fewer people understand the meaning of this constitutional right and when a defendant is entitled to its protection. In the 2010 New Mexico Supreme Court case of State v. Wilson, the Court recently ruled on the admissibility of criminal confessions in cases where the defendant was not given Miranda warnings and his or her judgment may have been… [read post]
19 Sep 2012, 7:55 pm by jmaddock
The BC Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal of Jennifer Nicole Nagle on a charge of possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, ruling that travelers leaving Canada can be searched in much the same way as travelers entering Canada. Continue reading ? [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 7:39 am by John Rubin
I thought I’d take a few minutes and jot down some questions and answers about the new fine-only punishment scheme for Class 3 misdemeanors for many defendants (enacted as part of the 2013 Appropriations Act). Several hours later—after thinking about the different permutations, reading several cases, talking with patient colleagues, and pondering further—I came up […] [read post]
8 May 2010, 8:14 am by Jeff Gamso
Not all wins are created equal.Take Kimberly Hurrell-Harring.  I've written about her case before.  It's the class-action lawsuit, brought by the New York Civil Liberties Union, challenging the provision of public defender services in five New York counties.  When the case was filed back in 2007, the NYCLU described it this way.The class action lawsuit charges that a lack of adequate funding, oversight and statewide standards is denying New Yorkers accused of crimes their lawful right to… [read post]