fidalgo_negro (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} fidalgo_negro) wrote,@ 2005-04-23 13:33:00 |
|
This past week I was assigned to a new case at the criminal defense clinic. This was a prior client of one of the Professors. Just a teenage kid in high school. In the past, he was busted on weed possession. Now, it was assault of a fellow student.
Sparing you the intricate details, I'll just say a little about the circumstances. This is a case where the young man, instead of being arrested and arraigned, was issued a desk appearance ticket, much like an ordinary traffic ticket, that required him to be in court on a certain date. But the People weren't ready to deal with his case for a while, and there are some complications in regards to the way they had to notify him or bring him in for later scheduled appearances.
After some research I realized that we had a compelling argument to have this case dismissed on speedy trial grounds, which essentially means we'll be alleging that the delays in this case were the People's fault, and that the number of days of delay went past the 90 days they had to be ready for trial (90 days for misdemeanors, 6 months for felonies).
If we succeed, it would a real smack in the face of the prosecution. Though cases often get dismissed down the road for reasons of speedy trial, rarely do they get dismissed so shortly after a defendant's arraignment.
I must admit, it is pretty thrilling to know that with just a little training one can learn how to exercise control over the state: getting a judge to essentially say "stop it."
Thus far, I am not sure how I feel about pursuing a career in criminal defense. Some of the people I have represented at the clinic did the crimes they were charged with committing. Some denied it. Others admitted to it. Others admitted to parts of the allegations, and denied other parts. But in every case a defense attorney is required to seek the best possible outcome for the defendant. Sometimes you do not mind. You believe the defendant has had a bad life. Or the circumstances were such that they were justified. But even in cases where you have a clearly guilty and remorseless offender, I generally feel as if I can justify my zealous defense. Why? The correctional system does not help. Prisons make things worse. It is not rehabilitative. It is no longer meant to be, and this is no secret. And lets not forget that law enforcement does abuse its power, sometimes even in cases where the defendant is clearly guilty. We need to challenge these abuses in every case, or else we may risk putting future innocent victims of such abuses in jeopardy.
Perhaps I could be a prosecutor if we had rational criminal laws, less abusive law enforcement, and correctional system that did not further exacerbate the problems of society. But being a defense attorney is not necessarily rewarding. I guess I'll play it by ear. My choice between civil and criminal may depend on where I can get a job when I graduate (I'll certainly apply anywhere I believe I have a chance). Then again, I'm taking a trial advocacy course with the district attorney of Brooklyn next fall, and he is known to offer jobs to students just on the basis of their performance in class. I wouldn't call it "selling" out, as the pay still isn't great for ADAs. I'm not 0 sure I could turn down such an opportunity if there weren't any other prospects. If I took the job, I would probably be fired pretty quickly as I started disobeying the orders of my supervisors by dismissing cases against drug possessors. And, no, I'm pretty sure it is impossible to change them from the inside. Maybe it could lead to some good press? Or a book deal?
Sparing you the intricate details, I'll just say a little about the circumstances. This is a case where the young man, instead of being arrested and arraigned, was issued a desk appearance ticket, much like an ordinary traffic ticket, that required him to be in court on a certain date. But the People weren't ready to deal with his case for a while, and there are some complications in regards to the way they had to notify him or bring him in for later scheduled appearances.
After some research I realized that we had a compelling argument to have this case dismissed on speedy trial grounds, which essentially means we'll be alleging that the delays in this case were the People's fault, and that the number of days of delay went past the 90 days they had to be ready for trial (90 days for misdemeanors, 6 months for felonies).
If we succeed, it would a real smack in the face of the prosecution. Though cases often get dismissed down the road for reasons of speedy trial, rarely do they get dismissed so shortly after a defendant's arraignment.
I must admit, it is pretty thrilling to know that with just a little training one can learn how to exercise control over the state: getting a judge to essentially say "stop it."
Thus far, I am not sure how I feel about pursuing a career in criminal defense. Some of the people I have represented at the clinic did the crimes they were charged with committing. Some denied it. Others admitted to it. Others admitted to parts of the allegations, and denied other parts. But in every case a defense attorney is required to seek the best possible outcome for the defendant. Sometimes you do not mind. You believe the defendant has had a bad life. Or the circumstances were such that they were justified. But even in cases where you have a clearly guilty and remorseless offender, I generally feel as if I can justify my zealous defense. Why? The correctional system does not help. Prisons make things worse. It is not rehabilitative. It is no longer meant to be, and this is no secret. And lets not forget that law enforcement does abuse its power, sometimes even in cases where the defendant is clearly guilty. We need to challenge these abuses in every case, or else we may risk putting future innocent victims of such abuses in jeopardy.
Perhaps I could be a prosecutor if we had rational criminal laws, less abusive law enforcement, and correctional system that did not further exacerbate the problems of society. But being a defense attorney is not necessarily rewarding. I guess I'll play it by ear. My choice between civil and criminal may depend on where I can get a job when I graduate (I'll certainly apply anywhere I believe I have a chance). Then again, I'm taking a trial advocacy course with the district attorney of Brooklyn next fall, and he is known to offer jobs to students just on the basis of their performance in class. I wouldn't call it "selling" out, as the pay still isn't great for ADAs. I'm not 0 sure I could turn down such an opportunity if there weren't any other prospects. If I took the job, I would probably be fired pretty quickly as I started disobeying the orders of my supervisors by dismissing cases against drug possessors. And, no, I'm pretty sure it is impossible to change them from the inside. Maybe it could lead to some good press? Or a book deal?
