Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Public Defender bumper stickers

My pal Carol at Public Defender Revolution! is suggesting PD bumper sticker ideas. I like these:







Visit PD Revolution to offer more suggestions.
Posted by Gritsforbreakfast at 7:25 AM
Labels: ,

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Quit undermining justice.

2/16/2010 12:23:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Public Defenders are for the ignorant and the poor!

Come on guys, Public Defenders are paid by the very same people that are prosecuting you.

2/16/2010 12:41:00 PM
D.A. Confidential said...

Grits,
Good stuff, I enjoyed those.
And reading them made me curious about whether you've written anything or looked at the cost differences between jurisdictions that have public defenders and those that use private defense lawyers on a pay-as-you-go system, like we do here in Travis County.
Best,
DAC

2/16/2010 01:15:00 PM
Gritsforbreakfast said...

DAC, the Texas Task Force on Indigent Defense has done quite a bit of work on that topic. See here.

2/16/2010 01:41:00 PM
Gritsforbreakfast said...

12:23, It's astonishing to me that you consider the right-to-counsel "undermining justice." Just bizarre.

2/16/2010 01:42:00 PM
The Assistant said...

I've worked on both sides of the bench in a prosecutors office and a PD office. I can most assuredly state that PDs are not "for the ignorant and the poor." While at the PDs we got an appellate court ruling that essentially changed the way "absconding" from probation was defined. Yes, many times a PD is just doing damage control, but that's the exact same thing a private attorney would be doing.

I'll also say this- lawyers very rarely consider who it is that's paying them when it gets down to the nub of trial. When I'm in court I want to *win*, regardless of who my client is. PDs and court appointed lawyers are just as competitive about these things as anyone- and in some cases more so.

2/16/2010 01:58:00 PM
Anonymous said...

I wonder if there's a record on how many cases are won in Texas by public defenders?

I don't believe I would risk my life to a public defender, when I could hire someone like Dick DeGuerin versus a public defender.

If you do get a public defender always make it clear to the judge that the public defender is not representing you, but merely is serving as your counsel.

2/16/2010 03:29:00 PM
The Assistant said...

"I don't believe I would risk my life to a public defender, when I could hire someone like Dick DeGuerin versus a public defender."

Sure, and I wouldn't drive a free Camaro if I could blow a half million dollars on a Ferrari.

If your argument is that some lawyers are better than others, then sure, that's the case. Some lawyers ARE better than others, and they generally set their fee schedules with that in mind. If your argument is that Public Defenders do a bad job, you're going to need some evidence of that. I'm not saying they're perfect, but even Dick DeGuerin loses cases.

2/16/2010 04:12:00 PM
Anonymous said...

No Assistant I don't think public defenders do a bad job. But as I recall, and I believe I read about this on "Grits," a story about the public defender "pool." As I recall suspects weren't always getting the "better" attorneys, because the government didn't feel like they should. I believe and I may be wrong, but now attorneys are on a rotation list to do pro bono work as public defenders? So what I'm getting out is, what about all those people in the past that got inexperience attorneys or ones that just plain sucked?

As far as myself I'm a big believer in "jury nullification." I refuse to put someone in prison for 6 months for a little rock of crack.

Now I know Assistant if you're an attorney you are forbidden to even mention the word jury nullification to a jury. That's a shame because I sure don't want you as my attorney, because you're not looking out for my best interest!

2/16/2010 05:18:00 PM
Anonymous said...

My bad "The Assistant," I just read your profile and see you're a assist. county attorney. And no way in hell would you want a suspect to know about "jury nullification."

2/16/2010 05:21:00 PM
The Assistant said...

"I believe and I may be wrong, but now attorneys are on a rotation list to do pro bono work as public defenders?"

Yes, you're wrong. You're describing two different systems, and the subject of DAC's posts. Some counties have rotation lists. In my county an attorney must ask to be on the rotation list. In some counties if you want to practice in front of the judge you MUST be on the appointment list. Either way, the judge appoints attorneys to individual cases and the attorney is otherwise free to take any paying clients he can find. Some counties do a straight rotation- matching defendants and attorneys down the list. A defendant might get the newest attorney in the pool or he might get the best attorney in the region. Some appointed attorneys are better than others, but some attorneys in general are better than others.

Some counties make appointments based on who's in court that day or who the judge happens to like. Your criticisms in those cases may be totally valid. A judge may be motivated to assign attorneys who will simply plea out the case to move his docket along. That doesn't help anyone. As a prosecutor it's like eating nothing but donuts for breakfast- you may enjoy it at first, but it doesn't get you anything but fat and lazy.

A public defender is a different animal. A PD does NOT have a private, retained caseload to worry about. They're like prosecutors in that respect and take whatever the court assigns. In some jurisdictions the judge merely assigns "PD" as the attorney, and it's up to their office to assign an attorney to the case. That can be very beneficial to clients as PDs get experience as the "DWI Guy" or the "Assault Gal." The biggest advantage to a PD is that each attorney doesn't have "paying" clients that they're inclined to spend more time on, and there's more often oversight from experienced attorneys. However, a PD's office tends to be overworked and understaffed and suffers from that.

"what about all those people in the past that got inexperience attorneys or ones that just plain sucked?"

I'd say that quite a few of those people paid good money to hire them. And some of them paid very little or nothing to have attorneys appointed for them. Even a retained lawyer sucks sometimes. In fact, some of the WORST lawyers I deal with on a daily basis are retained from out of town. So long as there are attorneys of different abilities in the system, this is going to happen. I've personally worked in a PD's office, been appointed on cases, and prosecuted. No system is perfect, but I've yet to see the kind of institutional corruption you seem to find behind every shadow. Do you have a solution to suggest?

"I sure don't want you as my attorney, because you're not looking out for my best interest!" Well, maybe I've got some words about your momma, but let's hold off on name calling for a bit, why don't we?

(continued)

2/16/2010 08:43:00 PM
The Assistant said...

In general, yes, I'm opposed to jury nullification. Why? Because it's not in the law. Not now, not under the founders, not in the common law, not ever. It's basically a fantasy on the level of tax deniers that it ever was. Does it happen? Every single day. Have I had it happen to me? On more than one occasion. Do I care? Not particularly. It's part of my job.


"I refuse to put someone in prison for 6 months for a little rock of crack."

So write your legislator. They wrote the law, and they're the ones to fix it. If I started enforcing the laws that I liked and ignoring the ones that I didn't I'd be strung up as unethical and abusing my authority. How is jury nullification any different? I want jurors who follow the law. Part of that is requiring that I prove every element of my case beyond a reasonable doubt. Part of that is voting to convict if I have. I've never been elected as a legislator, so all I can do is to enforce the law that I've been given. All I want from a jury is to do the same.

2/16/2010 08:44:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Tort reforms. Stop these legal/lawyers ripoffs from taking so much money for nothing. This makes insurance high for all of us. Make those w/o insurance pay premiums to offset those that do pay fo insurance. Stop meedicade for those ripping off all of us. Look at their houses and cars and still drawing medicade in fraude situations. Send them to Mexico. I'm tired of paying all these lazy fat criminals.

2/16/2010 09:02:00 PM
Anonymous said...

"A defendant might get the newest attorney in the pool or he might get the best attorney in the region. Some appointed attorneys are better than others, but some attorneys in general are better than others."

I'm not going to risk my life or going to prison on I "might" get a good attorney or I "might" not. That doesn't sound like fair justice. Let's not forget that you the county attorney has endless amount of money you can get from the state to convict someone, but the public defender will have only a very limited amount of money to prove his client is not guilty. Where's the fairness and justice in this?

"Some counties make appointments based on who's in court that day or who the judge happens to like. Your criticisms in those cases may be totally valid. A judge may be motivated to assign attorneys who will simply plea out the case to move his docket along. That doesn't help anyone. As a prosecutor it's like eating nothing but donuts for breakfast- you may enjoy it at first, but it doesn't get you anything but fat and lazy."

You are a joke sir! How would you feel if you were before a judge and the judge said, you know son I really like this one attorney, I'm going to assign him to you. Talk about a conflict of interest!

So you admit that your a fat whore? Do you ever speak up or report these judges when you know the judge is doing something like that? Probably not, cowards usually stay quite. Hey what do you care right? You're getting paid good money, win or loose.

"A public defender is a different animal. A PD does NOT have a private, retained caseload to worry about. They're like prosecutors in that respect and take whatever the court assigns. The biggest advantage to a PD is that each attorney doesn't have "paying" clients that they're inclined to spend more time on, and there's more often oversight from experienced attorneys. However, a PD's office tends to be overworked and understaffed and suffers from that."

Well thank you for pointing out that most public defenders are inexperience. Again the public defender will NOT have a full staff working for him, like your office has. Don't forget you have a endless amount of money you can use of tax payers money and the public defender will have only a small amount of money to prove his client is innocent.

"I sure don't want you as my attorney, because you're not looking out for my best interest!" Well, maybe I've got some words about your momma, but let's hold off on name calling for a bit, why don't we?"

Say that to my face and I wouldn't say a word to you, but if you momma is still alive I'd track her down and have some fun with her!

"I refuse to put someone in prison for 6 months for a little rock of crack.

So write your legislator. They wrote the law, and they're the ones to fix it. If I started enforcing the laws that I liked and ignoring the ones that I didn't I'd be strung up as unethical and abusing my authority. "

Most laws are not made to "help" the people, they're made to "control" them. You're an idiot if you don't know that the "crack" law is made towards "blacks."

So you send a black man to prison for a $10 rock of crack, how much is it costing the taxpayers to keep this man in prison for 6 months and to pay your salary and the judge?

2/17/2010 07:13:00 AM
Anonymous said...

So if you honk with that bumper sticker, the police can search your car right?

Moral of the story, never take legal advise from a bumper sticker.... LOL.

2/17/2010 07:59:00 AM
The Assistant said...

"I'm not going to risk my life or going to prison on I "might" get a good attorney or I "might" not. That doesn't sound like fair justice."

Ok, so hire one. You might pick a good attorney, and you might not. The attorney you hire might have spent all his time working on a case paying more than yours, and the prosecutor trying the case might have had his mom die the week before trial. The jury foreman might be a former nun full of forgiveness and it might be a Marine Corps drill sergeant. That's the system we have- one that's run by actual people with actual flaws. Sorry.

"Let's not forget that you the county attorney has endless amount of money you can get from the state to convict someone"

HA! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh wait, you seriously believe that. Let me refer you to my post over on DA Confidential about what I actually do. I can't get enough petty cash funds to make a trip to Kinkos, much less try to railroad someone that's not guilty. But lets say that hypothetically I'm working a murder trial and I want to frame someone up. As Grits pointed out a few days ago, doing so may well bankrupt my county. And even if I DID by some stretch of the imagination have unlimited funds, I sure don't have unlimited time. I'm the only prosecutor in my office, so I've got my hands too full of guilty people to go looking for innocent ones.

"You are a joke sir!"

Not really. I'm going out of my way to nicely explain to you how the system actually works as opposed to your incorrect view of it and you're calling me a whore and a coward.

"Well thank you for pointing out that most public defenders are inexperience."

Actually, quite the opposite. The PDs office I worked at had two lawyers who consistently appeared as the top lawyers in any field in that state. Both of them did some pretty special things. If you want to find inexperience in the legal profession, look to your misdemeanor prosecutors. Nearly all of us have fewer than 5 years as a practicing attorney. What I said was that PDs are often overworked, but that's true of basically every lawyer on either side.

"Don't forget you have a endless amount of money you can use of tax payers money..."

Again. Um, no.

"Most laws are not made to "help" the people, they're made to "control" them. You're an idiot if you don't know that the "crack" law is made towards "blacks.""

Actually, I'm quite aware of the disparity in federal sentencing guidelines between powder and rock cocaine. It's wrong headed, and ought to be done away with (something I feel about most sentencing guidelines). And if you feel so strongly about how wrong the law is, I'll wait for your candidacy announcement.

"how much is it costing the taxpayers to keep this man in prison for 6 months and to pay your salary and the judge?"

$30-40 per day depending on facility, I make less than $50,00 per year, and about $140,000 per year. The judge and I will make these salaries regardless of who does or doesn't get convicted. These are all numbers that I'm quite aware of when I consider sentencing options, and usually result in probation or other non-jail sanctions.

Any other questions? Or just more names you want to call me?

2/17/2010 08:58:00 AM
The Assistant said...

Clarification- a Texas District Judge makes about $140,000 per year. Not me. Oooooh heavens not me.

2/17/2010 09:01:00 AM
Jackie said...

"I can't get enough petty cash funds to make a trip to Kinkos, much less try to railroad someone that's not guilty."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!
What a big fat crock of b*llsh*t.
http://www.jackiebuffalo.com/index2copy.html
I would just luv to know : how much money was spent on me and my kid for almost three years of this harassment, in an attempt to put me in prison, after a SIDS death ?
It cost a whole, whole lot to run this vigilante outfit.
Oh, and in 2003 I went to dinner with a male friend of mine, whose PD friend, Billy, joined us, being so wiped out after having his nephew handed to him by DPD, after he was yanked from a flight at DFW because he had a bag of pot on him.
(Let me spell this out: the nephew did not get arrested and charged, but was delivered to the PD uncle.)

2/17/2010 09:16:00 AM
The Assistant said...

"What a big fat crock of b*llsh*t."

Really? You know of some slush fund in my budget? Because I could really use some more dry erase markers...

2/17/2010 09:24:00 AM
Anonymous said...

To: The Assistant

You know what you don't have balls and I can prove it. What county do you work in?

Being a Assistant County Attorney, you're not an elected official and I bet anything that you are at your office posting these messages on "tax payers dollars!"

So step up and be a man, and tell us all what county you are in?

2/17/2010 10:01:00 AM
The Assistant said...

Says the person posting without any nom de plume whatsoever...

2/17/2010 10:49:00 AM
Anonymous said...

"The Assistant said...

Says the person posting without any nom de plume whatsoever..."

Give me the county and I will call you and give you my name. Until then you're coward and you have no balls! I'm a man of my word.

"The Assistant said...

Actually, I'm quite aware of the disparity in federal sentencing guidelines between powder and rock cocaine. It's wrong headed, and ought to be done away with (something I feel about most sentencing guidelines)."

You know this law is wrong and yet you continue to enforce it because you're a fat money whore!

So what county are you in, I know your mother didn't raise you as a coward did she?

2/17/2010 11:01:00 AM
The Assistant said...

Last post because my patience has finally worn thin. After being called an incompetent attorney, fat whore, fat money whore, coward, trying to control people, full of bullshit, without balls, not a man, and coward (again), I'm reminded of something my Momma always told me- don't wrestle with a pig, you just get dirty and the pig likes it.

As to your last posting though, it's obvious you're not actually reading anything I'm writing. Otherwise you'd have seen that the crack / powder sentencing disparity is for FEDERAL FELONY POSSESSION and I work as a STATE MISDEMEANOR PROSECUTOR. I'm happy to join in discussions here, but this isn't a discussion.

2/17/2010 11:13:00 AM
Anonymous said...

To: The Assistant

My last post as well!

I'm going to find out who you are, and I will start with "Travis County," since you were so kind to point us to your other blog.

Posting on blogs while being paid by tax payers, I don't think so!

It's not that hard to get IP address from this blog.

2/17/2010 11:23:00 AM
Gritsforbreakfast said...

11:23, why not mind your own business instead of seeking vengeance on somebody because they disagree with you. Are we in third grade where you're going to go rat to the teacher in retaliation? Geez.

Also, if it's not hard to get the IP address of commenters here, that's news to me. I don't collect that data.

I'm betting your little snitching plan won't get you very far. Grow up, for Goddsake, and don't take disagreements so personally.

2/17/2010 01:38:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Oh come on Grits it's ok for public servants to be wasting time on your blog while being paid tax payers? I'm sure this D.A. has hundred's of cases he could be working on instead of having it out with that one guy all day long?

I'm also interested to know the name of this asst. d.a. who's stealing and cheating the tax payers.

2/17/2010 02:02:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Girts what's wrong with ratting out or snitching on a public official? The police and government have no problem and encourage the public to snitch on each other. "Just like the Nazi's did."

I personally believe that all "paid informants" should be put to an early grave!

2/17/2010 02:17:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Actually: RE jury nullification, there was substantial discussion in the Common Law as regarding the right and duty to nullify the law if said law was contrary to common sense. The jury, according to John Jay, and James Madison, were those that tried both the facts, and the law in controversy. The trials of Zenger, Throckmorton, Bushell, were all heavily talked about by the founders, and Madison went so far as to declare, in no uncertain terms, that there was no legitimate jury that did not have both the right, the power, and the duty to nullify those laws that were outside of reason, or the constitution.

The nature of the jury was heavily discussed in the Federalist 83, in order to lay down the roots of the judicial system itself. It was nothing less than a barricade against the government or magistrate that chose to tyrannize. They may do that in no other way than nullification.

The founders themselves profited from juristic nullification. Simply because a tool can be abused, does not make it an invalid tool. The jury is society's voice in the law, determining the nature and facts of the law, and its application to the crime in question.

Certainly, it has room for abuse, hence the voir dire process. But to say it does not exist in the Common Law is false. It is part and parcel of the Common Law since the Thirteenth century that we know of, under the Magna Carta and the Scottish Right. The Throckmorton and Bushell cases themselves were about the power of the Jury to find against the instructions of the judges, and to be free of punishment for so doing.

Such misrepresentation shows a substantial lack of research on the subject beyond what was presented. You might choose, and do well to dig into the histories, rather than presenting a blanket view that is not supported by the histories, diaries, or letters of the founding.

2/17/2010 02:52:00 PM
Gritsforbreakfast said...

2:02, if you're that small of a person, go ahead. Like I said, I'd wager your little snitching plan won't get very far.

In the meantime, if you're not willing to put your name on your comments, don't flame others who visit here. It's cowardly and nonconstructive.

2/17/2010 05:18:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Gritsforbreakfast said...

In the meantime, if you're not willing to put your name on your comments, don't flame others who visit here. It's cowardly and nonconstructive.

What's wrong with you Grits? The Assistant is a NO name as well. You know him, friends of his?

If someone makes a screen name, that good enough for you to belive them and find them credible?

I still think you're freaking awesome person!

2/17/2010 05:55:00 PM
Susan E. Anderson, Asst Public Defender said...

I am a Public Defender and damn proud of it. I do what I love and love what I do. Since I don't get bogged down in having to run a business, I get to focus all of my attention on my clients.

In Dallas County, we are often called the best lawyers money cannot buy. Not only does our office have a number of attorneys who are Board Certified in Criminal Law, but of the current criminal court judges, about 1/3 are former Public Defenders. So don't knock our abilities or our commitment.

"I wonder if there's a record on how many cases are won in Texas by public defenders?"

What an assinine question. Every lawyer wins and loses cases and not every win is defined by a "not guilty" verdict. Obviously a two word verdict is a win. But if you are able to beat the plea offer, that, too, is a win. If the DA wants pen time and you get probation, that is a win as well.

As for the bumper stickers, I thought they were entertaining.

2/18/2010 12:36:00 AM
Anonymous said...

" Susan E. Anderson, Asst Public Defender said...

I wonder if there's a record on how many cases are won in Texas by public defenders?"


I wonder maybe someone should start a website up and start a data base of cases won and lost by attorneys?

Actually I'm wanting to start a site in Texas of a data base of attorneys that have had complaints filed against them with the state.

Someone did this with doctors a few years back.

2/18/2010 10:51:00 AM
The Assistant said...

"Actually I'm wanting to start a site in Texas of a data base of attorneys that have had complaints filed against them with the state.

Someone did this with doctors a few years back."

This information is already available through the state bar. If you go to http://www.texasbar.com and click on Client Assistance / Grievance then there is a form to Find a Lawyer by name. This will show all public disciplinary action within the last 10 years. Or, you can call the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel at (877) 953-5535 and request the full disciplinary judgments against an attorney.

2/18/2010 12:03:00 PM
Anonymous said...

The Assistant said...

This information is already available through the state bar.

If you go to http://www.texasbar.com and click on Client Assistance / Grievance then there is a form to Find a Lawyer by name. ..and request the full disciplinary judgments against an attorney.


Thanks but it's not that easy to locate, hell you lost me after "form to Find a Lawyer by name," and I'm pretty good with websurfing. Just imagine how hard is must be for others looking for that information.

The website I want would have every attorneys name that has ever had a grievance or complaint filed against them in Texas in the last 10 years.

Thanks for the States "site," I think you just have saved me a lot of money as far as requesting the names and complaints.

2/18/2010 02:17:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Lawyers live off the poor and hardships of society. None of them are decent or worth two cents. They go into their careers fully knowing they survive off the problems of society. Helpers?....No...users and misusers of hurt situations.

2/18/2010 07:56:00 PM
Anonymous said...

People hates lawyers until they need one. THen they hate them because they need them. Can't win for losing.

2/18/2010 10:32:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Know how to tell when a lawyer is lying? When their lips move.

2/18/2010 10:55:00 PM
Anonymous said...

here is another sugestion: if you want to walk-don't talk

2/19/2010 06:03:00 AM
Anonymous said...

Lawyers have America so screwed up that even heath care is damned from their greed for money. What ever happened to intergity with lawyers?

2/19/2010 03:47:00 PM
Anonymous said...

I think most lawyers skipped class the day integrity was taught.

2/20/2010 06:43:00 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)