TexasCHLforum.com

WildBill wrote:If the jury had any sympathy for the deceased, which I think they did, this statement could seem very cruel and callous to a jury.

I don't think we're looking at Clarence Darrow or William Jennings Bryan here.

- Jim

One strange thing that gets me is how the press reports some details and leaves out others.

They won't make mention of the intruder's actual blood alcohol level or where he illegally got drunk (something some other adult must have had a hand in) or why he was wandering the streets at 2am but it seems really important to report that the homeowner was naked and had a laser-sighted Glock pistol full of hollow point bullets.

seamusTX wrote:

WildBill wrote:If the jury had any sympathy for the deceased, which I think they did, this statement could seem very cruel and callous to a jury.

I don't think we're looking at Clarence Darrow or William Jennings Bryan here.

- Jim

A mistrial? You never know.

A mistrial just drags out the misery if the prosecutor is not going to drop the case. This one said he will not drop the case.

Besides, the mistrial was none of the attorneys' doing. A juror (a) disobeyed the judge's instructions and (b) ran her mouth. She is lucky she isn't warming a steel bench on contempt of court.

I hope it's clear by now that shooting fleeing intruders in the back in Bexar County is a really bad idea, at least until a new DA is elected.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:Besides, the mistrial was none of the attorneys' doing. A juror (a) disobeyed the judge's instructions and (b) ran her mouth. She is lucky she isn't warming a steel bench on contempt of court.

In a just world, she'd be paying the lawyers' fees. That would make people think twice.

That's a good point.

This juror misconduct cost the state and the defendant a lot of money, no different in principle from crashing a car into a china shop. This was intentional misconduct, not just an "oopsie."

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:That's a good point.

This juror misconduct cost the state and the defendant a lot of money, no different in principle from crashing a car into a china shop. This was intentional misconduct, not just an "oopsie." - Jim

The judge could probably find a juror in contempt, but is misconduct a crime? What is the penalty?

I dunno.

At some point juror misconduct can be criminal, such as taking a bribe to render a verdict or bring about a mistrial. This is very rare. Maybe it happens once a year in the U.S.

Jurors cause mistrials much more often than that without any penalty other than shame.

- Jim

WildBill wrote:

gemini wrote:

DoubleJ wrote:or the defense didn't want their newly acquired fame and fortune to end so quickly!

A quick search shows Michael J Sawyer (atty San Antonio) as a General Practice Lawyer.
Why would Lemes hire a General Practice atty? I would not hire my Family Practice doctor
to perform heart surgery. I would hire the best heart specialist I could afford. Same with
criminal charges, hire a specialist, a Board Certified Criminal Defense Trial lawyer.
So, maybe it's true. You get what you pay for...?
If my info is incorrect. Someone please steer me in the right direction. Thanks.

The Texas State Bar lists both Michael J. Sawyer and Joe James Sawyer's practice areas as "Criminal". Both have been lawyers since the 1970s. Neither is a Board Certified Specialist. According to the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, only 10% of the lawyers in Texas are certified specialists. Hiring a certified specialist doesn't mean that you are getting a better attorney.

http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm ... tID=229815" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm ... tID=185758" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.tbls.org/WhyChooseBoardCertified.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and I would strongely disagree with you. There are only 10% for a reason. Only 10% are qualified. All atty's can practice criminal,
estate planning, tax law, insurance, personal injury law etc etc etc. Great. But I would ONLY be interested in a attorney that
specializes in the field I need work done. ie. hire a Oil & Gas attorney to review a lease or be up to date on TRR commission rulings
or specifics. Something a estate/trust lawyer might not be on top of. Not saying a estate / trust atty isn't good. Can't practice in the
O&G area.... but .... really. I would want a lawyer who is regularly practicing before the criminal courts, a trial attorney. A Board Certified Criminal Trial lawyer that actually has enough court cases behind him to even be eligible to be Board Certified. It is an area of specialization. Just like an orthopedic surgeon, facial cranial surgeon, heart surgeon etc..... yea, a general practice physician can perform those same surgeries.... but not on me or my family.
You SHOULD be getting a better lawyer for that (criminal defense) specific area of law. I would go to a Civil atty for a contract matter.
Choose who you will. I will choose the best of the best, if possible.

You have to be able to afford it.

This is one of the cruel jokes of the American justice system. The wealthy can afford the best attorneys, who can persuade a jury that night is day and God didn't make little green apples. The indigent take their chances with public defenders, but it doesn't cost them anything. Middle-class people can well spend all the money they have and be stuck with liens and payments for years.

- Jim

gemini wrote:and I would strongely disagree with you. There are only 10% for a reason. Only 10% are qualified.

It is fine with me that we disagree. Certification is an option and is not required. I do not agree that only 10% are qualified and that qualification is based on being certified. There are many reasons why an attorney chooses to take the effort to get certified or chooses not to get certified. I can only pray that neither you or I will require the services of a criminal defense lawyer.

seamusTX wrote:You have to be able to afford it.

This is one of the cruel jokes of the American justice system. The wealthy can afford the best attorneys, who can persuade a jury that night is day and God didn't make little green apples. The indigent take their chances with public defenders, but it doesn't cost them anything. Middle-class people can well spend all the money they have and be stuck with liens and payments for years.

- Jim

I guess in this, it's choosing the lesser of two evils? Prison or payments.
I know which one I'd choose.

I have never been a criminal defendant, so I don't know exactly how this works.

If you go to, say, Dick DeGuerin or Rusty Hardin, does he ask you how much you are worth and tell you that you can't afford him? Or does he just take at all?

This isn't simply a question of staying out of prison, though obviously that is important. Your family can be impoverished even if you are acquitted.

- Jim

WildBill wrote:

gemini wrote:and I would strongely disagree with you. There are only 10% for a reason. Only 10% are qualified.

It is fine with me that we disagree. Certification is an option and is not required. I do not agree that only 10% are qualified and that qualification is based on being certified. There are many reasons why an attorney chooses to take the effort to get certified or chooses not to get certified. I can only pray that neither you or I will require the services of a criminal defense lawyer.

I would venture most get certified because they have chosen a field of "specialization". Again, just like a Dr would do.
I'm good with us agreeing to disagree.

seamusTX wrote:I have never been a criminal defendant, so I don't know exactly how this works.

If you go to, say, Dick DeGuerin or Rusty Hardin, does he ask you how much you are worth and tell you that you can't afford him? Or does he just take at all?

This isn't just a question of staying out of prison, though obviously that is important. Your family can be impoverished even if you are acquitted.

- Jim

Both fine choices if you're in trouble!
It's up to the individual atty. MOST will get a retainer out front. The amount will depend on the charges. Some have standard fees. The initial fee
covers initial consultations, maybe an assist in bonding out, initial hearing (GJ). Then, depending on the type of trial (anticipated length)
an additional payment is sometimes required. Might have to retain investigators, expert witnesses etc. Again, depends on the atty. The atty will tell you at what stages the fees are due. Have any Priors? A practicing criminal defense atty will usually have a relationship with the DA's office. Maybe they can cut you a deal. Clean record? In our case, a clean shoot?
They are familiar with the courts, and different judges etc. Definite advantage vs an atty who takes the occassional criminal case.(IMHO).