Waco Criminal Law Blog : Waco Criminal Lawyer & Attorney : Walter Reaves Law Firm : DWI, DUI, Drug Crimes, Appeals : Waco, McLennan County, Texas

I really enjoy stories about stupid criminals - those who clearly are not cut out for a life of crime. I've represented a few (but I'm not going to talk about my cases) - sometimes they even get some sympathy from the court for being so inept. I decided to share those stories, and plan on making this a regular feature. So on to the first winner.

According to  the AP, two young men's attempt to escape from the Alton city jail was short lived. It seems they decided to escape by crawling through a vent. Unfortunately, the ceiling was not made to accommodate that type of weight. The first one went through the ceiling - falling into the police chief's office!!

I don't know whether they wrecked the jail or not, but they were transferred to the Hidalgo County jail. Probably a good thing, because I can only imagine what the other inmates would be saying.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Since I've started to following blogs - which has only been a few months, I've noticed an increasing number of criminal defense related blogs. Austin lawyer Jamie Spencer is putting together a list, and soliciting blogs. So if you know of criminal defense related blog, send it to him at jamie@austindefense.com.

I'm interested to find out just how many are out there.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

You have to wonder whether there is more to the story. Police in Lakeville, MN apparently  implemented  a public service campaign to remind people to secure their homes and residences. It seems they do this in the middle of the night, as one resident found out. According to an AP story, police knocked on someone's door, and couldn't get anyone to answer - so they went inside. There were 4 children there, who were having a sleepover. They told the officer their father was upstairs, so the police went in and woke him up, and apparently asked if everything was alright. If I was awakened in my bedroom at 3:00 a.m. by a police officer, I would have to say no!

Maybe I'm too skeptical, but I wonder if there wasn't some other reason they wanted to go inside and look around. There's a doctrine called the community caretaking exception, which allows police to skip getting a warrant when they reasonably believe someone is in danger. I think this would be carrying it a little too far though.

All joking aside, stories like this show why our founding fathers wanted to be sure we had protection against unwarranted government intrusion. That's what the Fourth Amendment is for. While it is generally only an issue in criminal cases, it exists for everyone, to protect us all against unwanted drop ins.

Its worthwhile to remember that in many countries, this is nothing out of the ordinary. It's also worthwhile to remember that this why we, as criminal defense lawyers, do what we do.
Criminal defense lawyers are the ones who hold the government accountable, and in doing so, ensure that everyone  keeps the freedoms that so many have fought and died for. So that we can all go to bed, and expect only the alarm clock to wake us up.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I was in court the other day, and caught part of a hearing where a defendant was complaining about his lawyer. One of the complaints is one we hear all the time - he hasn't showed me all the evidence the State has against me. The judge tried to explain to him the rules of discovery, but like most people, he found it hard to believe.

I think  most people would agree that there is nothing more serious than facing a loss of your liberty. If you are going to have to defend yourself, you want to know what evidence the government has. Most people believe you are entitled to that - after all, we always hear about all these "rights" criminals are supposed to have. How can a proceeding be fair if you don't know what evidence is?

The reality is that there is no such thing as discovery in criminal cases. Under the rules, the State only has to provide copies of your client's statements, and any expert reports (e.g. drug analysis, DNA results, etc..) They do not have to provide offense reports, or witness statements. You are only entitled to those after the witness testifies - so you can cross-examine them. There's an old joke about waiting to try the case to find out what the facts are, but that could happen.

Thankfully, most prosecutors will open their files, and allow lawyers to look at what they have. You have to then sit down, and take notes on what you see. Some more enlightened prosecutors actually provide copies of whatever they have.  Not only is that fairer, it also helps resolve cases. It's hard to decide what to do when you don't know what the evidence. It's also impossible to advise a client on whether or not to go to trial when all you have is the prosecutor's assurance that he is guilty. You need to know what the evidence is, and the prosecutor is in total control of the flow of information.

In contrast to what you have access to in criminal cases, in civil cases you can obtain almost anything. Most of the time is civil litigation is devoted to discovery. You can file interrogatories, requests for production and take depositions. In the process you can learn everything about the case, and the parties. You can sue someone for $1,000.00 and find out almost everything about them. If you look at the rules of discovery, you would think civil cases are  more important than criminal cases.

Discovery reform has been addressed in the last several sessions of the legislature, without much success. Prosecutors are obviously reluctant to turn over what they have - they like it the way it is. As with most criminal justice issues, anything that appears to be favor criminal defendants is opposed. That belief system will rarely succumb to logic and common sense.

The fact is that adopting uniform rules of discovery would streamline the criminal justice process. Access to information can do nothing but help move cases along. When you know what the evidence is, you can make an informed decision. Providing that information early means cases can be resolved quicker. Even if the case has to go to trial, what's wrong with a defendant knowing all the evidence?

The legislature will meet again soon, and you can always hope this session will produce something. I'm not going to hold my breath though....

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As criminal defense lawyers, we tend to focus on faults and shortcomings in the justice system. No doubt there are many, and there is a lot of room for improvement. At the end of the day, though, we still have the best justice system of world. We often forget that things we take for granted, don't exist elsewhere. Take the presumption of innocence for example - something that is one of the cornerstones of our justice. Mexico is just now putting that into their justice system.

They are also are implementing some other reforms - like public trials. Again, that is something else we take for granted.

We shouldn't stop pushing to make the system better, and addressing those cases where the system has not worked. But we should also stop every now and then and remember how lucky we are to even be able to do what we do.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to Rebecca Blank, an economist at the Brookings Institute, the current low unemployment rate may be attributed in part to the increase in the number of people in prison. According to Blank, the rate would be about  a half point higher were it not for the people in prison; the difference for black males is closer to a full percentage point.

Her theory makes sense. Most people who end up incarcerated have limited skills, and if they were out would be competing for the lower paying, unskilled positions. With fewer people competing for the positions, the chances of getting a job are higher. She also notes the impact incarceration has for those released from prison. They generally have a hard time finding employment, and may remain unemployed for a longer period of time.

One thing she stated that I thought was interesting was that drug use hasn't increased over the last several years. We are simply locking up more people, for longer periods of time.

incarcerating individuals has effects on society that few people think about. Not only do the taxpayers have to pay for it, they also have to pay for the support that has to be provided to the families of those in prison. Once they are released, we still have to pay for supporting those who cannot find a job. If we thought through the collateral consequences, programs aimed at avoiding incarceration would make a lot more sense.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I received a press release yesterday from Justice Barbara Hervey. Justice Hervey is a member of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and has been at the forefront of trying to educate lawyers and the judiciary about innocence issues. The press release announced the establishment of the Texas Criminal Justice Integrity Unit. According to Justice Hervey, this is "a call to action to address the growing concerns with our criminal justice system."

According to the press release, the unit will address the following issues:

• Improving the quality of defense counsel available for indigent defendants.
• Implementing procedures to improve eyewitness identification.
• Making recommendations to eliminate improper interrogations and to protect against false confessions.
• Reforming the standards for collection, preservation, and storage of evidence.
• Improving crime lab reliability.
• Improving attorney practices and accountability.
• Adequately compensating the wrongfully convicted.
• Implementing writ training.
• Establishing local, “home rule” protocol for the prevention of wrongful convictions

I think this a good start, but it is just that. Everyone has to take this seriously, especially prosecutors and judges. It's not enough to address preventing wrongful convictions, although that certainly is important. We have to address how to identify those persons who have been wrongfully convicted. When it comes right down to it, it is up to judges to make those decisions; unfortunately, they are not politically popular decisions, and as a result, we have have seen most non-DNA cases rejected.

Let's hope more education is the answer. It certainly cannot do anything but help to keep the issue at the forefront of discussion. Justice Hervey recognizes it's time to stop talking, and start acting. Let's hope others follow her lead.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link