Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[Mrs G Norris]

The state is never "forced" to make a deal. But if the defense makes a good offer, why not talk to them?

Would a good deal at this stage have to involve full disclosure (with excruciating detail that matches all the available evidence) from Casey herself, or do you think the state would accept a statement from Baez that his client is guilty?

Also, if the state has evidence which hasn't been released could this still come out after the sentencing?

 

[wonders]

The state is never "forced" to make a deal. But if the defense makes a good offer, why not talk to them?

Thank you very much AZlawyer for answering my question.

To answer your question. IMO the defense dosen't deserve to get a deal after two years of BS and underhanded tactics ( TES, Contraband to KC, $200,000.00 + just to name a couple of things that bug the he$$ out of me.). Mason's media blunders? Are they really blunders or on purpose?

Why in Gods name aren't they working on a real defense for KC? IMO it's because they have nothing to defend her with. I really believe that they are doing everything in their power to cause appellate issues in the future. I feel so sorry for the tax payers of Florida to have to put up with such nonsense.

There was a little two year old girl by the name of Caylee who IMOO was murdered by her so called mother Casey. Can any one person on the defense side really ignore how horrible her death must have been?

I guess I want to know why the defense gets away with so much. Like throwing $12.00 on a table in the degrading way it was done to a man who was kind enough to accommodate the big babies.

Casey Anthony and her "Boys" don't deserve a deal after TWO LONG YEARS.

Okay. I will stop now. Sorry for being such a Debbie Downer today but all of the BS just gets under my skin.

JUSTICE FOR CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY!

 

[AZlawyer]

Would a good deal at this stage have to involve full disclosure (with excruciating detail that matches all the available evidence) from Casey herself, or do you think the state would accept a statement from Baez that his client is guilty?

Also, if the state has evidence which hasn't been released could this still come out after the sentencing?

1) No excruciating detail would be required, but Casey would have to personally agree in court that she was guilty of whatever charges were part of the deal.

2) Depends what you mean by "evidence" and why it wasn't released. If it's really evidence (i.e., relevant to the case) it will be released before trial, and hopefully before whatever the deadline is for disclosure of evidence.

 

[Kentjbkent]

Read an interesting book, coincidentally authored by Diane Fanning this weekend and it got me wondering.....:waitasec:

http://www.dianefanning.com/truecrimebooks/apoisonedpassion.html

A young mother is accused of murdering her husband. Body is eventually recovered and prosecution has very strong case.

Defense files Motion to Supress Evidence, which judge denies.

Quotes from book...

"With this hurdle crossed, the prosecution's case looked more and more like a slam dunk - and the defense knew it."

"The defense team had made a decision on the previous Friday night: If their motion was denied, there was only one possibility remaining - their client had to plead no contest."

"If she went to trial, Wendi would face a sentence ranging from 9 to 99 years. They had to improve the odds."

"A No Contest plea allowed her:

1. Not to admit guilt

2. To preserve her ability to appeal

3. Locked in a period of incarceration far more tolerable than the maximum she faced."

"In minutes, the plea agreement was ready. Both sides agreed in open court to forgo a jury trial and submit the case to the judge."

"The defendant plead No Contest and then admitted her guilt in the unrelated child endangerment case."

Defendant was announced Guilty and sentenced to 25 years on the murder conviction and 10 years each on the two tampering charges.

"What happened in the courtroom played a huge role in creating an environment where multiple scenarios flourished. Wendi did NOT plead guilty; she pled no contest, owning up to none of her actions. The judge warned her that that plea meant the court would find her guilty of murder, yet she went ahead with it anyway. The end result was no trial, no open forum for the public release of documents, evidence and the giving of testimony from those who'd uncovered the crime. That complication made it difficult and time consuming for court watchers to do a complete analysis of the crime." (note by me...*think appeal)

So, TWO hypothetical questions....

1. Is it possible this case could end with a similar No Contest plea for similar reasons as stated above?

2. Do you think Baez reads Diane Fanning books?!!! :dance:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Well, that would be a nightmare if she was allowed to plea No Contest ... is it correct that it is up to the discretion of the judge whether he accepts a plea such as this - is it true a judge can say 'it's either you plead guilty, or we go to trial'?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Regarding a previous post - Does a defendant have to have permission from the court to plead "no contest"?

 

[Macushla]

If it is true that JB's home or one of his houses is now in foreclosure, I am wondering about how his financial situation will affect his ability to defend KC.

Since he was privately retained and therefore not eligible for payments from the JAC, does this extend to his employees too? Such as secretary, paralegals, etc. Now this may be just a stratigic default, I don't know, however, if he really is having financial difficulties and these extend to his law practice, where does that leave him in regards to his ability to defend any of his clients to the best of his ability? Can an attorney declare himself indigent?

Seriously, if this does affect his ability to defend KC, will the Judge remove him from the case or should JB ask to be removed because of these issues?

 

[AZlawyer]

Read an interesting book, coincidentally authored by Diane Fanning this weekend and it got me wondering.....:waitasec:

http://www.dianefanning.com/truecrimebooks/apoisonedpassion.html

A young mother is accused of murdering her husband. Body is eventually recovered and prosecution has very strong case.

Defense files Motion to Supress Evidence, which judge denies.

Quotes from book...

"With this hurdle crossed, the prosecution's case looked more and more like a slam dunk - and the defense knew it."

"The defense team had made a decision on the previous Friday night: If their motion was denied, there was only one possibility remaining - their client had to plead no contest."

"If she went to trial, Wendi would face a sentence ranging from 9 to 99 years. They had to improve the odds."

"A No Contest plea allowed her:

1. Not to admit guilt

2. To preserve her ability to appeal

3. Locked in a period of incarceration far more tolerable than the maximum she faced."

"In minutes, the plea agreement was ready. Both sides agreed in open court to forgo a jury trial and submit the case to the judge."

"The defendant plead No Contest and then admitted her guilt in the unrelated child endangerment case."

Defendant was announced Guilty and sentenced to 25 years on the murder conviction and 10 years each on the two tampering charges.

"What happened in the courtroom played a huge role in creating an environment where multiple scenarios flourished. Wendi did NOT plead guilty; she pled no contest, owning up to none of her actions. The judge warned her that that plea meant the court would find her guilty of murder, yet she went ahead with it anyway. The end result was no trial, no open forum for the public release of documents, evidence and the giving of testimony from those who'd uncovered the crime. That complication made it difficult and time consuming for court watchers to do a complete analysis of the crime." (note by me...*think appeal)

So, TWO hypothetical questions....

1. Is it possible this case could end with a similar No Contest plea for similar reasons as stated above?

2. Do you think Baez reads Diane Fanning books?!!! :dance:

I'm not sure Baez reads much. :waitasec: But it looks like the case Diane Fanning was talking about involved a plea agreement , not just a change of plea. It's certainly possible that this case could end with a plea of no contest if the state and defense manage to reach a plea agreement, as I can't imagine KC standing up and actually admitting to doing any harm to Caylee.

Well, that would be a nightmare if she was allowed to plea No Contest ... is it correct that it is up to the discretion of the judge whether he accepts a plea such as this - is it true a judge can say 'it's either you plead guilty, or we go to trial'?

Why would it be a nightmare?

Regarding a previous post - Does a defendant have to have permission from the court to plead "no contest"?

No, the judge can't just reject the plea, but he does have to make sure it's voluntary.

 

[AZlawyer]

If it is true that JB's home or one of his houses is now in foreclosure, I am wondering about how his financial situation will affect his ability to defend KC.

Since he was privately retained and therefore not eligible for payments from the JAC, does this extend to his employees too? Such as secretary, paralegals, etc. Now this may be just a stratigic default, I don't know, however, if he really is having financial difficulties and these extend to his law practice, where does that leave him in regards to his ability to defend any of his clients to the best of his ability? Can an attorney declare himself indigent?

Seriously, if this does affect his ability to defend KC, will the Judge remove him from the case or should JB ask to be removed because of these issues?

No, attorneys don't have to withdraw due to poverty. But he might be allowed to withdraw if he says that the case has become an extreme financial hardship for him.

 

[nums24]

No, attorneys don't have to withdraw due to poverty. But he might be allowed to withdraw if he says that the case has become an extreme financial hardship for him.

Hi AZlawyer! With JB's past fiscal issues delaying his entry to the bar, would the foreclosure have any adverse affect on his "good standing" with the FL Bar?

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi AZlawyer! With JB's past fiscal issues delaying his entry to the bar, would the foreclosure have any adverse affect on his "good standing" with the FL Bar?

No. And IIRC I don't think it was "fiscal issues" that delayed his entry to the bar so much as his complete indifference to whether or not he complied with a court order to pay something (was it child support?). I may have the details wrong, but I know it wasn't SOLELY the fact that he couldn't pay his bills.

 

[aeli2468]

2) Depends what you mean by "evidence" and why it wasn't released. If it's really evidence (i.e., relevant to the case) it will be released before trial, and hopefully before whatever the deadline is for disclosure of evidence.

This may have been answered already, but I couldn't find it. When is the deadline for disclosure? Do we know what it is for this case? If not, when is it normally?

Just curious how much more time we have for doc dumps.

thanks!
elizabeth

 

[ZsaZsa]

No. And IIRC I don't think it was "fiscal issues" that delayed his entry to the bar so much as his complete indifference to whether or not he complied with a court order to pay something (was it child support?). I may have the details wrong, but I know it wasn't SOLELY the fact that he couldn't pay his bills.

The Florida Bar had this to say about Mr Baez Esq.
His overall behavior showed a total lack of respect for the rights of others and a total lack of respect for the legal system,which is absolutely inconsistent with the character and fitness qualities required of those seeking to be afforded the highest position of trust and confidence recognized by our system of law.

 

[Chiquita71]

Well, IMO HHJP will allow the review whether or not he thinks the defense attorneys are acting in bad faith (which they are). HHJP does not want any successful appeals, and if CM's verbal face-plant actually resulted in KC's team not seeing potential evidence, there might be an issue of ineffective assistance of counsel at that point.

Quote Respect AZlawyer and Thank You.
BBM

I read that the law says if a person is being defended by a retained lawyer as opposed to a appointed lawyer they cannot claim ineffective assistance of counsel. Is that true? TIA.

...js...

 

[Omachka]

LWOP is life without the possibility of parole. "Life" is usually life with the possibility of parole. But it's only a possibility, so they still call it "life."

Quote is very respectfully snipped for space. I'm not a lawyer so I shouldn't be answering here but I have to say that with a conviction of murder in Florida life means life now... there is no parole for that. You can read at this link

While I'm posting, I want to thank you so much, AZ, for all the time you spend on this thread answering all of our questions. You rock!

 

[RedSox Mom]

According to the latest article posted on WFTV Bill Scheaffer has said that Baez has damaged his credibility with Judge Perry regarding Baez's contact with RL. How would this manifest itself in the JP's courtroom, if at all?

TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

This may have been answered already, but I couldn't find it. When is the deadline for disclosure? Do we know what it is for this case? If not, when is it normally?

Just curious how much more time we have for doc dumps.

thanks!
elizabeth

I know a deadline was set, but I can't remember which order it was in. I bet if you ask in the Q&A thread, some much more organized person will know the answer.

Quote Respect AZlawyer and Thank You.
BBM

I read that the law says if a person is being defended by a retained lawyer as opposed to a appointed lawyer they cannot claim ineffective assistance of counsel. Is that true? TIA.

...js...

I've never heard of that. Do you have a link?

According to the latest article posted on WFTV Bill Scheaffer has said that Baez has damaged his credibility with Judge Perry regarding Baez's contact with RL. How would this manifest itself in the JP's courtroom, if at all?

TIA

The judge might not be willing to rely on Baez's memory anymore. (I.e., "Judge, I distinctly remember that I asked for that document on 3 separate occasions; I just can't find the requests in my binder...") But quite honestly I think JB lost credibility re: the likelihood of his legal arguments being any good a long time ago.

 

[Chiquita71]

Hello WS

Here's that link AZlawyer. Thank you very much for your response.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=80246

Since Powell v. Alabama, it has been accepted that a defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel whose performance does not fall below a minimum level of effectiveness; however, the courts have been struggling to give meaning to the term 'effectiveness of counsel.' The 'farce and mockery' standard, which originated in Diggs v. Welch, was adopted in most of the States and Federal circuits, although many courts adopted less restrictive standards. The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to provide a standard by which effectiveness of defense counsel can be evaluated under the sixth and fourteenth amendments. The lower courts have used McMann v. Richardson as authority for the development of standards more liberal than 'farce and mockery.' Twenty-nine of the State courts have rejected or modified the 'farce and mockery' test, and five States are currently reevaluating this test. Although attitudes are changing, many courts have held that a different standard applies to retained counsel than to appointed counsel, with the defendant being ineligible for relief when retained counsel is used, since there has been no 'state action' depriving the defendant of due process of law. Generally, trial counsel is presumed to be effective unless the defendant shows the contrary under whatever standard applies in the relevant jurisdiction; however, the burden of proving prejudice differs among the many jurisdictions. Examples of ineffective assistance of counsel from court decisions are provided in the areas of pretrial, guilty pleas, inadequate time to prepare, trial tactics, and post trial. The relief that may be granted when counsel is deemed ineffective is briefly discussed. Twelve secondary sources are listed.
(end)

TIA

...js...

 

[AZlawyer]

Hello WS

Here's that link AZlawyer. Thank you very much for your response.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=80246

Since Powell v. Alabama, it has been accepted that a defendant has the right to the assistance of counsel whose performance does not fall below a minimum level of effectiveness; however, the courts have been struggling to give meaning to the term 'effectiveness of counsel.' The 'farce and mockery' standard, which originated in Diggs v. Welch, was adopted in most of the States and Federal circuits, although many courts adopted less restrictive standards. The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to provide a standard by which effectiveness of defense counsel can be evaluated under the sixth and fourteenth amendments. The lower courts have used McMann v. Richardson as authority for the development of standards more liberal than 'farce and mockery.' Twenty-nine of the State courts have rejected or modified the 'farce and mockery' test, and five States are currently reevaluating this test. Although attitudes are changing, many courts have held that a different standard applies to retained counsel than to appointed counsel, with the defendant being ineligible for relief when retained counsel is used, since there has been no 'state action' depriving the defendant of due process of law. Generally, trial counsel is presumed to be effective unless the defendant shows the contrary under whatever standard applies in the relevant jurisdiction; however, the burden of proving prejudice differs among the many jurisdictions. Examples of ineffective assistance of counsel from court decisions are provided in the areas of pretrial, guilty pleas, inadequate time to prepare, trial tactics, and post trial. The relief that may be granted when counsel is deemed ineffective is briefly discussed. Twelve secondary sources are listed.
(end)

TIA

...js...

Thanks for the link. That source is from 1979, so maybe if "attitudes were changing" already by then, that would explain why I haven't heard of this argument.

 

[Katprint]

No, attorneys don't have to withdraw due to poverty. But he might be allowed to withdraw if he says that the case has become an extreme financial hardship for him.

I have been know to cite the "involuntary servitude" prohibition contained in the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in support of my motion(s) to withdraw.

In California, the appellate courts have repeatedly held that attorneys cannot be forced to work for free and can invoke the protections of the Thirteenth Amendment. http://www.metnews.com/sos/1003/H025600.PDF In other states, invoking the Thirteenth Amendment may just make the judge angry. http://www.lenconnect.com/news/x436985863/Attorney-s-quip-angers-judge I have no idea what would happen in Florida with Judge Perry.

Katprint
Always only my own opinions