Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
House Mouse said:
I've been lurking in the corners like any good mouse will do, but have to come out of hiding to ask this question. Forgive me if this is the wrong place or if it has been asked and I just missed it.

The prosecution first asked for the incamera ex parte hearing on Feb 3 requesting to delay sharing discovery. On Feb 24, JS gave them 30 days to withhold the discovery. When would that 30 days begin, the date of the original request, or the date of the court's response?
Click to expand...

Love your avatar and . . .

:Welcome-12-june:
 
House Mouse said:
I've been lurking in the corners like any good mouse will do, but have to come out of hiding to ask this question. Forgive me if this is the wrong place or if it has been asked and I just missed it.

The prosecution first asked for the incamera ex parte hearing on Feb 3 requesting to delay sharing discovery. On Feb 24, JS gave them 30 days to withhold the discovery. When would that 30 days begin, the date of the original request, or the date of the court's response?
Click to expand...

I've been lurking in the corners like any good mouse will do,
Click to expand...
After this part of your post I like you already:) Welcome and please keep posting:)
 
affinity said:
Please forgive me if this has been asked previously.

If either CA of GA were to be charged with obstruction or accessory (after the crime) would they then be subject to the Son of Sam law? and if so, is the Son of Sam law "retroactive"? For example if one or both are charged would money from appearances, an "intentional" foreclosure and money spent from the "foundation" Fall under scrutiny (due to Son of Sam law)?
Click to expand...

I don't know if Florida is even one of the states that enacted a "Son of Sam law," or, if so, what the specific provisions are. But I have never heard of one of these laws that would look retroactively back at funds received prior to being charged with the crime.
 
AZlawyer said:
I don't know if Florida is even one of the states that enacted a "Son of Sam law," or, if so, what the specific provisions are. But I have never heard of one of these laws that would look retroactively back at funds received prior to being charged with the crime.
Click to expand...

It only applies to funds from conviction forward.....AND only to funds paid pertaining to the case conviction.
 
Is it true that a DP verdict is always followed by an automatic appeal? I thought I had read that somewhere. If the same does not apply with a LWOP verdict, then an attorney who files appeals in a LWOP case would have to be paid for his/her time. Is this correct? I am not talking about cases where they do it pro bono or are working with an organization that takes on cases where they feel the person was innocent.
 
Macushla said:
Is it true that a DP verdict is always followed by an automatic appeal? I thought I had read that somewhere. If the same does not apply with a LWOP verdict, then an attorney who files appeals in a LWOP case would have to be paid for his/her time. Is this correct? I am not talking about cases where they do it pro bono or are working with an organization that takes on cases where they feel the person was innocent.
Click to expand...

It is in Arizona. Not sure about Florida.

Whether the appeal is automatic or not, though, has nothing to do with whether the attorney gets paid. We generally like to get paid either way. :)
 
AZlawyer said:
It is in Arizona. Not sure about Florida.

Whether the appeal is automatic or not, though, has nothing to do with whether the attorney gets paid. We generally like to get paid either way. :)
Click to expand...

Oh I am sure you do like to get paid, and I probably didn't word that question as well as I could have. Thanks for answering.
By the way, I love AZ - mostly because my son and his family live there and I go visit them quite often. I try to avoid going out there in late summer though, just too darn hot!
 
I have a question for our wonderful lawyers. Can JS deny her indigent request and if so on what grounds and also if he did deny it what would happen then?
 
Hi and thanks to all Attornies for your input. Is there any possibility that having the State pay the tab,will they be able to put a rocket on the defense to move along faster?
P.S. I wanted to say where the rocket should be attached :dance:
 
butterfly1978 said:
I have a question for our wonderful lawyers. Can JS deny her indigent request and if so on what grounds and also if he did deny it what would happen then?
Click to expand...

He could deny it on the grounds that she's not indigent, but I think she is, don't you?
 
Nore said:
Hi and thanks to all Attornies for your input. Is there any possibility that having the State pay the tab,will they be able to put a rocket on the defense to move along faster?
P.S. I wanted to say where the rocket should be attached :dance:
Click to expand...

The State would not be allowed to interfere with the defense.

Don't worry, Judge S has the power to make the case move faster if he thinks that needs to happen. But he's going to make sure that the defense team has all the time they need, to avoid any appellate issues.
 
Thanks in advance!

If Baez stays on the case and the state pays only the expenses will they also pay the travel expenses for her out-of-state lawyers??? That does not seem fair to the FL taxpayers as they would not have those type of expenses if KC was using the Public Defenders office.
 
AZlawyer said:
He could deny it on the grounds that she's not indigent, but I think she is, don't you?
Click to expand...

I think she probably is now, however she was not and the money that she did have her lawyers did really nothing with it, they did nothing but file stupid motions wasting time and money when they should have been examing evidence and giving depo's. I do not think it is right that her lawyers can blow the money and now say they want tax payers to pay the bill, they should somehow be accountable, its not right.
 
Cher352 said:
Thanks in advance!

If Baez stays on the case and the state pays only the expenses will they also pay the travel expenses for her out-of-state lawyers??? That does not seem fair to the FL taxpayers as they would not have those type of expenses if KC was using the Public Defenders office.
Click to expand...

I don't think they would cover those kind of expenses.
 
House Mouse said:
I missed that when I read the order. Thanks! :blushing:
Click to expand...
I know this is OT needed to say hi!
Housemouse:dance:
So good to see you posting!!!! Hope you and Mr. Mouse doing okay!
Thanking of you with best wishes
Savannahanna
 
Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

TIA!
 
savannahanna said:
I know this is OT needed to say hi!
Housemouse:dance:
So good to see you posting!!!! Hope you and Mr. Mouse doing okay!
Thanking of you with best wishes
Savannahanna
Click to expand...

Please forgive the OT, but feel I need to set things straight.

Being that there is no Mr. Mouse in my house, I think you must have the wrong person.

I'll say hi in return anyway. :wave:
 
House Mouse said:
Please forgive the OT, but feel I need to set things straight.

Being that there is no Mr. Mouse in my house, I think you must have the wrong person.

I'll say hi in return anyway. :wave:
Click to expand...


just to help out: there are TWO "house mouses" now at WS

one is previously known from Astrology forum... Housemouse
and a new one... House Mouse...

:whistle:
 
Snaz said:
Question for one of the lawyers on the board: If KC, by some miracle, decides to plead guilty to the murder of her child, doesn't that take the DP off the table? Isn't LWOP the most she can get, at that point?

As I understand it, that is one of the reasons defendants will sometimes plead guilty at some point along the way; to avoid the DP.

TIA!
Click to expand...

Thanks for this question Snaz, and I'd like to tag along with it - just to get the plea process clear in my mind once and for all. I believe you've answered this in the past AZ or Themis, but once more please?:waitasec:

If and when the defense comes to the table with a guilty plea, doesn't the SA then begin a negotiation process, starting with the DP, since that's what's on the table and negotiate from there?

In other words, the SA can say these are the conditions and the consequences we outline for a plea, and the defense can accept the conditions or no?

Do you think the SA will drop the DP for LWOP for a guilty plea, if the defense approaches for said guilty plea? Or does the judge make this decision?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 96 more.
Total: 4,264 (members: 97, guests: 4,167)

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
4,167
Total visitors
4,264
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,284
Messages
17,966,582
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top