You know what I don't use. A web cam. I've never installed one at my office or home. My macbook has one built in but it's always off. I'm not sure I want the entire internet staring at me while I type in my pajamas.
This bring me to our case of the day. What happens when a State's witness doesn't want to appear in person?
Case- Acevedo vs. State-
Facts- Acevedo was found guilty of murder. One witness, his sister, lived in Chicago and testified via web cam.
Issue- Can a web cam satisfy the right of confrontation?
First what's the law on confrontation? From the opinion
The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment provides, in pertinent part, “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const. amend. VI; Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 (1965). This clause, known as the Confrontation Clause, “guarantees the defendant a face-to-face meeting with witnesses appearing before the trier of fact.” Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1016 (1988). The right includes not only a “physical examination” but also (1) ensures a witness will testify under oath, “impressing him with the seriousness of the matter and guarding against the lie by the possibility of a penalty for perjury;” (2) forces the witness to submit to cross-examination, “the 'greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of the truth;'” and (3) permits the trier of fact to observe the witness's demeanor when giving testimony, “thus aiding the jury in assessing his credibility.” Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 845-46 (1990). The combined effect of these elements serves the central concern of the Clause: “to ensure the reliability of the evidence against a criminal defendant by subjecting it to rigorous testing in the context of an adversary proceeding before the trier of fact.” Id. at 845.
In court cross examination is a great tool for discovering the truth. I can see, hear, and even smell the witness against my client. I've only conducted pleas via close circuit camera (jail chain in Bowie County) but never cross examined a witness.
Even in something simple as a plea there is no rhythm to the conversation. The cadence of dialogue is gone, broken up by "What did you say?" and "Can you repeat that?"
It doesn't sound like much but it's one of the ways I get to my client's version of the truth. I'm not sure I could get the same results with Skype. With a client hundreds of miles away from the jury and me I would be at a disadvantage. What comes to mind first is exhibits. What if I wanted to ask the witness to read something? Or demonstrate something?
What about demeanor? You can't tell much about a witness from a grainy head shot. For example, many cops testify with their notes in their lap. Something you couldn't see via web cam. Finally, with me on a TV set they can control my volume and presence to the witness. Crescendo has less impact when the witness is starting at me through a netbook.
What did the court decide in this case? I will give the court credit for using very serious language in the opinion. They do not want to open the door to web cam testimony, but they do anyway.
In Texas, there are very few cases on allowing someone to testify remotely. They have been used, sparingly, for the terminally ill etc. In this case, the witness had a high risk pregnancy, which the court decides is the same degree of incapacity.
Question I have- I'm no doctor, but from what I've gathered about human pregnancy vs. terminal illness is that pregnancy usually ends within 40 weeks with the mother alive. Ergo, wouldn't the witness have been available later?
We conclude the trial court did not err in finding Garcia's medical condition constituted an exceptional circumstance that warranted permitting her testimony by remote two-way video conferencing or in determining the system used by the State did not deprive appellant of his Sixth Amendment rights. We overrule the third issue.]]>
Wow. It only took nine months but Barack Obama actually moved to limit federal power and increase State's rights. When Texas finally passes our MM laws (I'm guessing around 2109 after the other 49 states legalize), then our fellow Texans MM patients will not have to live in fear of federal, or state prosecution.
The most bizarre response to this common sense move is from Bryan Fischer at GOP.com.. Mr. Fischer argues that it's unconstitutional for the President NOT to order prosecution MM patients who comply with State law?
Frankly, it is unacceptable for a president to pick and choose which laws he wants to enforce, and which ones he doesn't want to enforce. He has only a handful of Constitutional responsibilities, and among them is the responsibility to "take care that the Laws be faithfully executed." His piece is so spun that he cites the commerce clause as the legitimate basis for federal prohibition. When did the right embrace the commerce clause as legitimate source of endless federal power?.Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to care about his Constitutional responsibilities..
Really? This only makes sense if you know nothing about a) prosecutions (which are completely discretionary and b) the Constitution. Bryan, it's completely acceptable for a President, or DA to decide what laws to enforce. Part of executive authority is deciding how to use limited resources.
The Constituion doesn't require that all laws before enforced at all times. In fact, some scholars even think the Constitution actually limits the power of the federal government. It's been a while, but I remember reading something about that in the 9th or 10th amendments.
Today's Court of Criminal Appeals Case of the day is.... Hughen v. State-
Facts- Hughen was arrested and charged with agg assault and attempted murder. Hughen was taken before a magistrate. During this time Hughen asked for a lawyer.
Undettered the police took Hughen to the interrogation chamber and had him sign a Miranda waiver. Hughen looked over the waiver form and, just before he signed the form, he asked. "This ain't waiving my right for an attorney, is it?"
The cop replied, "No, sir. This is just talking with us about what happened and what was going on and all that good stuff." Hughen then signed the waiver form.
Our CCA found that Hughen had waived the attorney he requested, and never received, in part based on the following exchange.
After Herrington explained to Hughen these rights, she asked him the following three questions and received his responses: (1) "Do you understand your rights, Jeff?" Hughen nodded in the affirmative. (2) "And understanding these rights, do you need to have a lawyer present before any questioning?" He answered, "I guess not right now, no." (3) "Having these rights in mind, will you talk to me now?" Hughen answered, "Okay."
"I guess not right now, no" would be an answer that a person without their lawyer would give. One of the things your defense lawyer will do is explain carefully why you should NOT talk to the cops. If you are in court you can't waive rights without your attorney present. Shouldn't the same protections apply to those in jail? But I digress.
The police proceed to get a confession. Hugen proceeds to get life and 20 years on the charges.
Wait a minute- Hughen sounds like he was guilty of some pretty bad stuff. Why should I care?
Good question. Upholding the rights of people like Hughen protects all of us. One of the reasons Texas routinely convicts the innocent is because we ignore basic Constitutional protections like the right to counsel. You would be shocked at how many people will confess under modern interrogations methods, even to crimes they did not commitT.
Worse, the police are allowed to lie and make up evidence that doesn't exist, to get your "confession." If a lawyer is present these games don't work. That is why the police and prosecutors are fighting so hard to destroy your right to have an attorney present during questioning.
With this ruling I'm going to have to move my office into the jail to keep the cops from making a run at my client every chance they get. Thanks CCA.
On a side note- Hughen did get that court appointed lawyer he asked for, a week later.
There may be one context in which the right to counsel still applies, custodial interrogations. From the opinion-
After Montejo, the Sixth Amendment does not bar police-initiated interrogation of an accused who has previously asserted his right to counsel. On the other hand, the Fifth Amendment does bar police-initiated interrogation of an accused who, in the context of custodial interrogation, has previously asserted his right to counsel during such interrogation, unless the accused's counsel is actually present. Minnick v. Mississippi, 498 U.S. 146, 153 (1990); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 484-85 (1981)
Remember kids, ask for a lawyer, then ask for a lawyer, then ask for a lawyer.
]]>In my experience most candidates are UT/SMU Big Law types. Steve's email indicated that he wanted to be the voice of the small firm/solo practicioner. Steve kindly agreed to an interview on issues I find important. Steve has earned my signature and I hope you will support his efforts.
If you want to support Steven and/or sign the petition (you have to a licensed Texas attorney) email Steve at Fish2026(AT)aol(DOT)com
Here is a Q&A with 2010 Texas Bar Presidential hopeful- Steve Fischer.
1. Background/resume
Licensed in 1983, practiced in El Paso, Odessa, Denton, Huntsville, and Rockport. President of Aransas Area Bar Assn. 2006-current. Former Willacy County & District Attorney. Served on three state bar committees, published four Texas Bar Journal Articles (three on Attorney Demographics).
HAve graduate degrees in law, public administration, and criminal justice, and taught at three Texas colleges.
2. Why do you want to be bar president?
A. My son Huey (who won the 1st Texas Bar Video Journalism Award) had been planning on a career in law but commented "No one likes attorneys" on several occasions and now has shifted his focus. He would have made a great and ethical attorney. This public perception hurts and offends me personally (see policy changes).
B. I also want to see small and solo firms, represented as well as criminal and family attorneys. Together these are among the largest portions of the bar, yet we are ignored at the leadership level.
C. I enjoy talking to people and groups and frankly I've experienced some "burnout" in my practice. This would be new and refreshing.
3. Any specific policy changes? What is your platform?
A. Have the Bar actively counter the sleazy ads most of which are out-of-state and basically say "Have you or a loved one been stricken with [insert debilitating disease)? Call X attorney" A counter ad campaign will at least show most attorneys do not approve of this.
B. Elevate the position and status of small firms and family and criminal practitioners. An example would be having the bar give regional awards such as "court-appointed attorney of the year" as court-appointed counsel work under the worst conditions for the lowest pay.
4. How can the bar better serve solo/small firms?
In a way that's putting the cart before the horse, once we have some leadership positions and focus on our type of practice, we can study this. For one though, judges need to understand that we can't be everywhere at once and at their beck and call, and there ought to be specific rules and rights for court scheduling published and adhered to statewide.
5. UNT law is scheduled to open in Dallas. Can the market support another graduating class of attorneys?
I've authored 3 Texas Bar Journal Articles on Texas Attorney Demographics and could give a complex and detailed answer. Let me say this, there are big cities in Texas with an overflow of attorneys, and small areas in need of more practitioners. There ought to be education as to what the overall employment situation might be in the future. Are prospective attorneys interested and knowledgeable in alternative areas if law practice or are they all planning to sign up for criminal appointments in our metro areas? There is a much greater need in Texas for good math/science teachers as well as nurses, than there is for attorneys. I am somewhat biased though as I received an MPA from UNT and believe they would do a fine job hosting any school.
6. How do you asses the current state of criminal justice in Texas?
We are about the same as most other states. Although I have defended more years than I have prosecuted, I am personally of the opinion that few of my clients (and there was a period when I was trying (defending) two murder trials a month) are ever really remorseful. I am in favor of the death penalty, although I would change both its procedure and administration.
7. Finally, I'm a member of the NORML legal committee. Do you support legalizing the responsible adult use of marijuana?
I favor a system like Denver has enacted where prosecution of small amounts of marijuana is the absolute lowest enforcement priority. Our economic and criminal justice resources are much better spent pursuing other crimes. I've written editorials on this too.
]]>Our latest political prisoner in the war on weed is Marc Emery. Marc is a marijuana activist/cannabis seed distributor in Canada. Marc sells marijuana seeds and the Canadian government happily taxes the profits. Marc is the founder of the British Columbia Marijuana Party and a leader in the movement towards cannabis sanity in the Great White North. Marc was recently arrested in Canada, and is awating deportation to America to face a 5 year sentence on federal drug charges.
Marc is being prosecuted for sending cannabis seeds through the US mail. A google search will show you that there are a few dozen operations offering a similar service. Consensual crime enforcement is nothing if not arbitrary and capricious. When millions are breaking the law the government can pick and choose whom to prosecute. While Marc was arrested for conspiracy to distribute his real crime was being an advocate for cannabis reform. Nothing pisses of the DEA mutawas like political dissent.
Think your federal government is above using the criminal justice system to destroy free speecht? This isn't the first time, nor will it be the last.
]]>1. Your client always has to appear, with one exception (first setting in CC2). Kaufman isn't Dallas and a lawyer appearing sans client is not the norm.
In extreme/emergency situations you can it's possible to reset a case without a client present (think ER). However, you will want to call the court before the day of the hearing and bring some documentation of your client's situation.
2. OPEN FILES! Discovery is a breeze. Simply call the DA (972.932.4331 ext 4) and ask for discovery to be printed. Or send a rep letter/discovery request. Discovery will be left up front for you to pick. DVDs are $5.
3. Pass, Pass, Plea or Trial. In misdemeanor courts you generally get 2 passes and then you have to set the case for something dispositive (plea/trial/pre trial). Exceptions are usually made for misdemeanor cases with companion felonies.
4. Trial settings mean trial. In Dallas multiple trial settings are not uncommon. In Kaufman only 1-4 cases set for jury trial each week. The odds are very high that your case will go to trial on the first trial setting. Sometimes a reset will be necessary for the breath test operator etc, but don't count on it. If you want a continuance make sure and file a motion. If you don't have a witness available the judge may attach (arrest) that witness.
5. Pre trial diversion- In Dallas this is called a "memo agreement". Kaufman has a limited program (and much more difficult) for dismissing cases without the necessity of deferred probation. It's usually 6 months for a misdemeanor, or 1-2 years for a felony. PTD is a little different in each court so ask your prosecutor for details.
6. Docket days are important. Feel free to call, email, or visit your prosecutor during the week. However, it's common to discuss the case and plea offers in court.
7. Pleading a misdemeanor? BRING COURT COSTS. Your client is expected to pay 100% of their court costs on the day of the plea. If you can bring the fine and court costs sometimes community service hours will be cut, or the fine may be reduced. If your client can't pay on the day of the plea they MAY be given an additional 30 days to bring CC. If not they may be reset for another plea date.
8. Examining trials are pretty rare. It's hard to get them set quickly and if you do file for one your client will find himself indicted at the next grand jury.
9. Be on time, but know when on time is. Each court has it's own time for hearings. Felony courts are at 9:00 or 1:30. CC1 is 8:30 or 1:30. CC2 is 9:45 or 2:00pm. In the 86th you have to "sign in" to speak with the DA. If you don't get there early you may the 12th lawyer on the list and have to wait an hour to speak with Brian or Cameron.
10. Bond reductions- It's preferred that you ask your ADA for an agreed bond reduction before filing a motion to reduce bail. The first question a clerk will ask you when filing a writ or bond reduction is "Have you spoken with the DA about this?"
I know that you have every right to file a motion on behalf of your client, but this is local practice. Besides, more often than not (especially on state jail dope) you can get an agreed reduction with a plea rec thrown in for good measure.
11. BBQ or Mexican? Culinary options are quite limited in K-Town. Stevie's BBQ on the Square is my favorite (it's also ten yards from my office). There are a number of local Mexican restaurants, none of which are bad, most of which are good, so feel free to explore. South of 175 are the chains- McDonalds, Pizza Hut, Denny's and Chicken Express.
]]>I can appreciate the public's desire for free answers to their criminal defense questions. Unfortunately, many criminal defense problems can't be solved within the limitations of AVVO. Ergo, one of my most common responses is "You need to hire experienced local counsel immediately".
Here are some common questions that I answer, without really answering-
"I've been charged with X, what kind of sentence will I get?"
Let's see. Without knowing the facts, court, prosecutor, legal issues, or your criminal history you want me to guess the outcome of a case based upon the charge? Really?
If I was that good I'd guess lottery numbers, not criminal case outcomes. A lawyer can't, and shouldn't guesstimate plea offers without a working knowledge of the facts, the legal issues, and the court/prosecutor.
I could quote the range of punishment and state that "You could get anything from the maximum sentence to a dismissal", such a large margin of error ensures 100% accuracy, but doesn't help defendants.
"I've been charged with DWI and offered ____. The facts of my case are as follows.... Should I take the state's plea offer?"
You should NEVER discuss the facts of your case on a public message board. It's a horrible (non privileged) idea. Prosecutors already search social networking sites for dirt. It's not outside the realm of possibility that your AVVO post could and would be used against you. Tread carefully online.
The frequency of "Should I take this deal" questions leads to me to believe that attorney/client communication is an area the defense bar needs to improve on. It may be that defendant's want a simple second opinion. Unfortunately there are no simple second opinions in criminal law.
What's the solution?
First, I don't want to overstate the problem. Many AVVO questions are answered with clear guidance for defendants. For example; questions on whether probation is possible in a certain case, or what the range of punishment is, or what the 5th Amendment means are frequently met with skilled responses.
What most AVVO questioners need is a free consultation; something that 99% of defense lawyers offer. The opportunity cost of a sit down interview with an attorney is much higher than posting a quick question online, but it's absolutely necessary for proper legal advice.
]]>My preference is to set ticket cases for trial and force the State to meet their burden. Unfortunately a ticket trial setting is an expensive endeavor. More expensive than simply requesting deferred and paying the ticket, or hiring the $65 ticket lawyer for a quick plea. I want treat these cases like a "real" criminal case- investigate the facts, pick a jury, cross examine the cop etc. I can't do those things for less than the cost of deferred probation (usually $200-$300).
Most defendants would rather take the sure dismissal with deferred than pay more to risk conviction at trial. I can't blame them. Ticket court is set up to maximize revenue, not achieve justice. Even though the vast majority of PI defendants are arrested and thrown in the drunk tank they have no right to court appointed counsel. It's another way we incarcerate without representation in Texas.
Justice often takes a back seat to finance and convenience. I'm still happy to discuss your PI case and offer my services. However, it's never cheaper or quicker to hire me to try your case. Until that changes, I may never become the PI fighting malfeasance exposing criminal defense super hero the public needs.
]]>I know that some attorneys prominently advertise their trial win percentage. The idea being that if Lawyer X wins 80% of their DWI trials then this lawyer has an 80% chance of beating your DWI. I applaud any attorney who can get a not guilty verdict from a jury. Too many defense lawyers strive to avoid trial at all costs.
In my experience lawyers who advertise a win % generally exercise great control over (cherry pick) which cases they will take to trial. Not me. The choice of whether or not to have a trial is always up to my client. If I was concerned with my W/L record I would accept only no breath test/good SFST DWI cases. I have chosen to go a different route. If I refuse to take a case it's not because the facts are bad.
I've had clients with high BAC scores who wanted to take a case to trial. That is always the client's choice. It's not my job to refuse a trial just because I'm afraid the client will be convicted. Any lawyer who tries DWI cases knows that even the most prepared, experienced, and knowledgeable defense lawyer can and will end up with a guilty verdict. It happens. Guilty verdicts are not always a sign the lawyer did a bad job, or is a sub par trial attorney.
My job is to explain the law, the facts, my experience in front of the judge/jury with similar cases and let the client make a decision on whether to set the case for trial. There are also financial considerations. I use a two part contract and charge a separate trial fee. My clients decide whether they want to invest in a trial or not.
I'm proud of my 3 DWI win streak, but I know some very capable attorneys who have gone on long DWI losing streaks (myself included). A lawyer's W/L trial stats alone do not always tell the whole story. There is a lawyer in my office in Kaufman, Dennis Jones, who is frequently appointed on the most serious felony cases. Many of Mr. Jones' appointed clients are convicted. Nevertheless, Dennis is viewed as one of the best defense lawyers in Kaufman county. I would not hesitate to recommend Mr. Jones and the judges never hesitate to appoint him. He's a great trial lawyer who happens to try really tough cases. Dennis can not cherry pick his appointed cases, and is often given chicken shit and ordered to make chicken salad.
Criminal defense isn't baseball. Some of us are pitching in the Ballpark in Arlington, others at Petco Park. Not that you should go looking for a lawyer who has never won a trial, but don't discount a lawyer who has lost a few.
]]>By far, addicts are the most difficult group to represent. Addicts can and do miss court dates (not to mention payments), pick up new cases, dress inappropriately (eg pajamas in court) and lack the mental stamina required for criminal litigation.
By definition addicts are short term thinkers. They see coming to court and worrying about their case as a problem with an easy solution- plead guilty and get probation.
Not so fast. Addicts make horrible probationers. State jails in Texas are a monument to the futility of putting addicts on probation and magically expecting behavior to change.
Probationers may hate their PO, hate doing community service, fall behind on payments, unable to find work, etc. Stress triggers drug use. Community supervision is stressful. Failing drug tests can often lead to a revocation hearing and/or incarceration. The road goes on forever, the party never ends.
I'm a criminal defense lawyer. I solve legal problems. Addiction is a medical issue that requires medical attention. I've had enough CLE on addiction (and viewed enough Intervention episodes) to know this is not an area I can personally assist clients. What I can and do recommend is that all clients with substance abuse issues seek treatment immediately.
The time between arrest and case disposition varies from county to county. In Dallas/Kaufman the average state jail dope case can take anywhere from a few months to nearly two years to finalize. I encourage all drug defendants (except the innocent non user) to use this time to address any addiction problem they may have.
Going to treatment is a win/win for drug defendants. I'm often asked if by defendants if they will "look guilty" if they seek help. My answer is always the same.
SEEKING TREATMENT WILL ONLY HELP YOUR CASE. It's a win/win for the defendant no matter how the case ends.
If your case is going to end in a plea bargain completing treatment helps. Part of plea bargaining is selling the defendant. If my client has completed treatment that will set him/her apart and often leads to better plea offers.
Unlike legal/factual problems which your defense lawyer may or may not share with the State (depending on the case/court/prosecutor the decision to divulge legal/factual issues must be carefully weighed) information about positive change in the defendant's life is always shared.
If your case goes to trial and you win, then completing treatment will help you avoid the rap, and the ride in the future. If your case goes to trial and you lose, then your defense lawyer can put on evidence (at the punishment hearing) that you are addressing your addiction problems head on, rather than waiting for the case to finalize. This can sway a judge/jury to grant a better sentence.
]]>Instead, Wendy dares Stan to "take this twig and jam it up your peehole." A shockingly typical SP ending.
Now replace Stan with the driving public, and Wendy with a MADD pyscho goon cop and you have the story of Jamie Lockard. From WLWT.com-
LAWRENCEBURG, Ind. -- An Indiana man has filed a lawsuit claiming that police forcibly withdrew blood and urine from his body during a drunken driving arrest, WLWT-TV reported.
According to the suit, police arrested Jamie Lockard, 53, on suspicion of drunken driving in March.
A Breathalyzer test showed he was under the legal limit, but Officer Brian Miller doubted the findings.
Lockard and his attorney claim in the suit that police took him to Dearborn County Hospital and forced him to submit to a urine and blood test.
Police said they obtained a warrant, but Lockard's attorney said his client was shackled to a gurney and had a catheter inserted against his will.
"It has to be executed reasonably," said attorney Doug Garner. "No one would say this is reasonable behavior. It's reprehensible that anyone could think that this is appropriate."
The blood test showed that Lockard's blood-alcohol level did not exceed Indiana's legal limit, police said.
Garner said the police officer did not apologize, but instead charged Lockard with obstruction of justice.
"He took it too far. He thought he could do whatever to me," Lockard said
Whereas a blood draw warrant allows the cops to hold you down and jam a needle in your arm, a urine warrant lets LEO put the force in forced catheterization.
The blood test also showed Mr. Lockard was not intoxicated. Mr. Lockward was released without charges and the police officer was suspended for this conduct.
Riiiight. Mr. Lockard was charged with "obstruction of justice" for having the audacity to protest the State's attempt to extract his urine. Such is our GITMO inspired war on DWI. DWI suspects, even the innocent ones, are still charged with something, while sadist cops roam the streets looking for new prey.
What's preventing this from happening in Texas? Nothing. At any time, any cop could get a FC warrant and start slant drilling on your privates.
Our appellate courts have fallen over themselves gutting your Constitutional protections to save DWI convictions. Your bodily fluids are merely "evidence" that can be seized at will by the State. All LEO needs is a fill in the blank search warrant faxed to a "friendly" judge and your blood, breath, and/or pee can be seized by the State.
It doesn't have to be this way. I've never, not once in my prosecutor/defense lawyer career seen a urine/bac case. Texans should demand that the urine be removed from the "alcohol concentration" definitions in the penal code.
The only use for DWI urine testing seems to be the torture of innocent drivers. I'm not expecting a groundswell of support for my "Free The Pee" campaign, but it's never to early to contact your representative.
]]>First, what I didn't like. Cruises are like day care for adults. You can literally quit thinking for 5 days and let the staff take care of you. Some people might enjoy a strict schedule and constant group activities. My wife and I have ample experience traveling Mexico and missed the freedom to explore on our own.
I would highly recommend a cruise for travelers with kids. One thing I didn't notice was children running wild over the boat. I learned that this trip had over 300 children on board. The Carnival staff did a marvelous job in loco parentis, kudos.
Second, I don't like "Fun Days At Sea", i.e. being trapped on a floating hotel with only four options-drink, gamble, eat, or sleep.
Gambling lost it's allure quickly. I was having awful luck at the casino. Ok, I took statistics in college. It wasn't luck. The casino did exactly what is was designed to do and I fell for it.
On eating- Cruises do not promote healthy eating habits. In my regular non sea faring life I have never found it necessary to eat a meal at midnight. Really, it never occurred to me that between dinner and breakfast you could fit another entire meal. However, on a cruise ship it seems normal, if not necessary, to eat a hot dog before going to sleep. Luckily, I packed a lot of tums.
If I was a gastric bypass surgeon I would sponsor the midnight buffet. That is your target audience. Until we got off the boat I was convinced this was not a cruise, but a human fois gras factory, and that we were headed for slaughter.
Enough complaining. I love Mexico and never have anything less than a great time south of the border. Our first stop was in Progresso. The beaches were beautiful and it had a more laid back feel than Cozumel/Cancun. Think Port Aransas vs. SPI.
I had never been to Progresso before but I'm hoping for a return trip. I only wish I had more that a few hours to explore the city. If you are on a cruise with limited time I would recommend skipping the private resorts and visiting the public beach. The public beach is close to the market and restaurants and looked like a great place to spend a day or five.
Our second stop was Cozumel which is one of my favorite places on Earth. The beach we visited included many floating amusements I had not experienced before. A short 20 yard swim from shore provided two trampolines, a giant slide, and an faux iceberg you could climb. It was like Wipeout Amateur Drunk edition. I can only surmise that personal injury lawsuits are much more limited in Mexico than here in the US.
I reported earlier that Mexico had decriminalized the possession of small quantities of drugs. What difference did this radical (by US standards) common sense measure have?
I can report that the tourist ports of Mexico are still geared toward mass alcohol consumption. I didn't see any crack dealers or strung out meth addicts. The only contraband I observed (by US standards) was the ubiquitous Cuban cigar. It may be too soon to tell but at least in the touristy parts of Mexico this small step towards ending Prohibition in Mexico has had no discernible effect.
I managed to not check my email for 3 days. I have to admit that even though I complained about the limitations and structure of cruising, it did keep me from working and/or thinking about work for 72 hours.
At first I was perturbed that the boat didn't have in cabin Wifi. But not being able to use my laptop helped me focus on not working. I watched the new Star Trek film (two thumbs up, and I'm no Trekkie), and spent time enjoying the company of my wife and friends. I have been glued to technology since I opened my practice and I realize how detrimental the tethering of email can be to one's personal life. It's hard to really enjoy anything when you are always on call, waiting for the next email.
Don't get me wrong, it's good to be back and I enjoy my usual routine. I know my clients have urgent matters that demand immediate attention. However, 5 days of not defending anyone will make a better lawyer in the long run. Not being able to blog/email/work on cases makes me want to blog/email/work on cases. Vacations are not a luxury when you are self employed. Rather, vacations are a mental health necessity.
]]>1. What was the offense?
2. What was the verdict/punishment?
3. What swayed the jury during deliberations?
4. What did the State's attorneys do/say that was most/least effective?
5. What did the defense lawyer do/say that was most least effective?
6. Any advise for defense lawyers on how we can do better?
7. Anything else?
I know enough about me and what I think is important during trial. Tell me more about you.
Besides the justness of the cause being an NLC member usually pays for itself. Cannabis consumers/producers and medical marijuana patients appreciate an attorney who won't judge them, and recognizes that these defendants are America's political prisoners in the War on Drugs. For far less than you would pay an SEO scam company you can join the proud freedom fighters on the NLC.
This years conference is at the Pier House in Key West. I've never been to Key West and I look forward to exploring the island. Do you need some CLE hours and a vacation? Meet me in Key West. You do not have to be a NORML member to attend (though you do get a discount on registration).
Any Key West travel tips would also be appreciated.