10 Principles of Defending People: #1 Put Yourself in Your Client’s Shoes (But Only for a Moment)

June 9, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

jeremy@texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been writing about what I think the top principles are when defending a person in the criminal justice system.

Here are no’s 2 – 10 to recap:

#1 Put Yourself in Your Client’s Shoes

There is much overlap in the principles I’ve suggested in this series.  You can make the argument this principle is really a combination of many of the other principles.

I must always remind myself my client and/or the people who love them often feel:

  • Scared
  • Confused
  • Angry
  • Uncertain
  • Embarrassed
  • Ashamed
  • Singled-Out
  • Hopeless
  • Worried
  • Anxious
  • Alone
  • Different
  • Abused

And even then I’m sure I’m over-simplifying what they must often be going through.  Criminal litigation is bet-the-farm type stuff.  People can lose their freedom and/or livelihood.

Lawyers have to appreciate just how important they are to their client and how much power they have in their client’s matters.  Just having an anxious client see my phone number pop up on their caller ID will ruin some people’s day even if I’m just asking a quick question or giving a small update.

Sometimes the simplicity of the golden rule is directly on target.  How would I, Jeremy Rosenthal, want someone handing the most important matter I could have in my entire life or even decade to conduct themselves?  Prepared… yes.  Organized… yes.  Knowledgable… yes.  Experienced… yes.  And on, and on and on.

Why wouldn’t I do my best to try and be the same way for another human who is experiencing many, if not all, of the emotions discussed above?

But Wait a Second…

There is an extremely important distinction.  I am not my client.

I am often asked by clients or their loved ones, “what would I do if I were in their situation.”  My answer is canned — but true:  “I’m not in your situation.”

I tell them I don’t know what keeps them up at night.  I don’t know what they want to be doing with their life in 10 years.  I don’t know if their great aunt Lucielle would spin in her grave if she knew they didn’t fight charges like the ones they’re facing.

The hard balance for any lawyer is putting themselves in their clients shoes and feeling the gravity of the situation — but remaining the detached expert who can give objective advice.  If I suffered from all of the emotional landmines I outlined above there is no way I could do my job.  I just have to remember they are always there.

Some lawyers do too good of a job putting themselves in their client’s shoes.  They stay there.  It can be problematic because the lawyer gets so wrapped up in the client’s problem — it becomes the lawyer’s problem too.  The lawyer loses objectivity, is less objective in their evaluations, arguments, and representation.

Lawyers need to put themselves in their client’s shoes… at least for a little while.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.

 


10 Principles of Defending People (#8 Be Optimistic & #7 Inoculation)

June 1, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Today I’ve got two principles to share and they can be summed up the cliche, “Hope for the best but be prepared for the worst.”

I’m summing up what I feel are the 10 most important principles a criminal defense lawyer should follow in their practice in this series.  You can read about my previous posts so far on the topic here:

#8 Be Optimistic

You won’t find much doom and gloom on my blog.  I’m sure there’s plenty of anger, grand-standing and self-ritcheosness… but hopefully not much fear-mongering.

People often shake as they’re walking into my office.  A big part of it is because they’ve been on the internet or gotten legal advice from their best friend growing up.  They think I’m going to confirm their fears about having body and appendages severed by the prosecution.

I have yet to come across a case in the zillions I’ve evaluated where there isn’t some hope, some ray of sunshine, or something to be optimistic about.  Granted, these things are relative and  if there weren’t legitimate reasons for concern — no one would come and see me at all.

But people crave optimism from professionals they deal with.  There is nothing wrong with being optimistic and letting folks know where the sunlight is.

#7  Inoculate People For Bad News

Again, today’s topic is a ying and yang concept.  While there is nothing wrong with being optimistic — people also don’t come to a lawyer to be lied to.

Bad news is unfortunately part of the job.  It’s important to discuss unpleasant possibilities for many reasons.  What is also important is putting them into context and letting someone know how realistic certain outcomes may or may-not be.

I find it is important to discuss possible bad news before it happens.  This way the lawyer and client can come up with a plan for avoiding the possible bad result and time to come up with another plan should the bad result come to fruition.  This gives the client and/or their family a sense of some control and allows time for them to wrap their mind around things.

I call the concept inoculation.  It is like eating vegetables.  It’s no fun to eat veggies at the table but it’s very healthy in the long run.  Discussing possible bad outcomes in a constructive way yields long term dividends.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.


Our Victory at the Texas Supreme Court Changes Expunction Law

May 16, 2018

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Time to crow a bit.

I won a trial roughly two or three years ago where my client was charged with the felony offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

After we won, we filed (what we thought) would be a routine petition for expunction clearing my client’s record of the arrest for which my client had been acquitted.  The DA’s Office and The Texas Department of Public Safety opposed our petition because my client had also been arrested for outstanding warrants on an unrelated case which occurred prior to her arrest for the aggravated assault.

The prosecution’s theory was the arrest could not be expunged because the arrest for the underlying warrants made the arrest good under the expunction statute… so she’d have to live with the arrest for the aggravated assault with a deadly weapon on her record forever even though she won her trial.  (This is highly nerdy lawyer stuff — so I’m paraphrasing a touch.)

The prosecution’s idea of the expunction statute before our case had governed their policies and practice statewide — that if you don’t qualify for any small part of this long statute then you’re out of luck.  They argued the record keeping of criminal records for DPS would be too difficult and too sloppy.

Screen Shot 2020-05-20 at 8.41.13 AM

After I convinced the trial judge in the case to order the records expunged over the State’s objection (no small task), the State appealed to the 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas and then to the Texas Supreme Court.  Special thanks to Thad Spalding and Morgan McPheeters from the firm of Kelly, Durham & Pittard in Dallas who handled the case after it left the trial court and briefed and argued it from the 5th Court in Dallas to the Texas Supreme Court.

Last week the Texas Supreme Court affirmed our case yet again, making it the law of the land.  Now when someone applies for expunction the test is whether they qualify under the specific provision of the expunction statute and not the statute as a whole.

It punches a hole in the decades-old practice of prosecutors and DPS that the expunction statute was “arrest based.”

You can read the opinion here.

Yeah, it’s nerd stuff.  I know.  But it can be fun to be a nerd sometimes!

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.

 


Top 5 Most Common Police Attitudes – #3

May 13, 2018

By Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Today I’m continuing my series on the top 5 police officer attitudes I’ll see when defending cases.  These are police attitudes I see from police officers while on duty.

#3 — CYA

That’s right. Cover your a$$.

One of the psychological pressures on officers is maintaining their livelihood.  They don’t want to lose their job or their pension over any single case.

I see this one mostly in cases where there is an alleged victim involved such as domestic assault, sexual assault or complicated theft schemes to name a few.  A police officer knows an upset accuser (or the accusers parents) can cause them all sorts of headaches with his or her superiors at the station.

For assault/ family violence cases police are worried if they leave a couple warring in their home after a 911 call — one of them could be killed later in the evening.

On sexual abuse cases whether involving adults or children, a police officer is going to have to have a really good explanation to their superiors as to why they told an angry person claiming to be a victim, “no, we don’t believe you.”

Police will often file cases as “grand jury referrals” which is their way of filing a case with the District Attorney’s office while expressing an underlying doubt about the case.  It is a case where they don’t make an arrest prior to grand jury.  It can be seen as unwritten permission to dump a case.  Grand juries may still indict, though.

It sucks to be on the receiving end of a case where you suspect it was filed because the officer was doing CYA work.  It has to be dealt with like anything else.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas.


Criminal Law in Small Counties

November 8, 2017

By Collin County Criminal Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

jeremy@texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

Most criminal defense lawyers will tell you the smaller the county, the harsher they are.

The New York Times agrees.  They wrote this article last year with an interactive map showing precise data from almost every county in the United States about their incarceration rates… and just as importantly…. their percentage of increase or decrease in the last decade.

The article focuses on Dearborn County, Indiana.  They sentenced a drug addict charged with possession of heroine to 35 years of prison.  You read that correctly.  The collection of small towns by the Ohio river jails more people than San Francisco and Durham COMBINED.

My practice is in Collin County, Texas.  It is the suburbs.  We are the 7th most populous county in Texas and the 63rd biggest county in the country according to Wikipedia on the date of the publication of this blog.  Being a bigger county, I don’t think we remotely resemble Dearborn County, Indiana.

From our Collin County base we see it all.  In addition to Collin, we practice in urban Dallas and Tarrant Counties.  We have neighboring suburban counties to our own in Denton and Rockwall Counties.  From time to time we have the occasion to practice in neighboring rural counties.

I should note there are always exceptions to the rule, and I’ve found practice in some rural areas extremely pleasant and excessively fair.  But bye and large, here’s why I think we often have “tough sledding” in rural counties as proven by the news article.

Eroded Checks and Balances

Our system of justice is supposed to have built-in safeguards in the form of checks and balances.  When those safeguards aren’t working — things go haywire.

Volume

Probably the largest unseen hand in any courthouse is that of volume.  Dallas and Tarrant counties have more cases than they know what to do with.

“Depth Perception” and Experiences

With greater volume the “extremes” are more pronounced… that is the most severe and egregious crimes tend to be much worse and the more borderline or unfair mishandled police investigations or prosecutions are probably extremely bungled and unfair.

With greater volume tends to be greater “depth perception” about how egregious any single case might be to a prosecutor.

A Dallas prosecutor might deal with 10 shoplifting cases before lunch every day.  So an 11th case won’t be earth shattering to them.  The prosecutor, then, also learns some of the common underlying factors of shoplifting such as mental illness or youthful exuberance… and they probably also see collateral effects of petty theft like immigration headaches or loss of college opportunities.  An urban prosecutor might give sweetheart plea offers on the shoplifting cases just to get to a 10 minute lunch break — or so they can focus on a more egregious case they’d rather prosecute more strictly.

A rural prosecutor might have the same shoplifting case but there is potential to be more strict for no other reason than they might not have anything worse to prosecute… thoughtful and sincere as they might be.

Pressure to Move Cases

Prosecutors are under pressure to move cases through the system.  Big counties have more of them.  Of course, it is relative based on personnel… but bigger counties are more over-worked, plain and simple.

Prosecutors who are pressured to move cases will almost always make better plea offers and/ or dismiss borderline cases.

Defense Lawyers

As a criminal defense lawyer, I should be the single biggest safeguard of a defendant’s rights.  I can cross examine, investigate and subpoena.  I can appeal and point people to adversarial remedies.

Police don’t like getting cross examined and they don’t like being investigated themselves.  They don’t like being told they are wrong in closing argument.  This only makes them human.

We are human too.  It is perfectly natural for a defense lawyer to fear retaliation by an angry judge, prosecutor, or police officer who takes exception to something we might do to defend a client.

In Collin County, I have the benefit of knowing that if I upset a police officer while I’m doing my job — there is a good chance I’ll never run into them in public or get pulled over by them randomly.  The same is even true with prosecutors and judges.  Though I’ll obviously see them on a more routine basis — chances are the next time I see them after a heated battle will be a month or two down the road by which time the water is under the bridge.

The bigger the county — the more aggressive the defense lawyers can be.  This is important.  The more aggressive the defense lawyers — the more careful police, prosecutors, and judges are when they do their jobs.

Independence of the Courts and Law Enforcement

It is always troublesome going to a courthouse where you know the police and the prosecutors, and the Judge (and sometimes the defense lawyers too) are drinking coffee together in the morning.

There’s nothing overtly wrong about these relationships — but it is obvious it makes it harder for a defendant to get a fair shake.  Judges, prosecutors, and defense lawyers are people too (a recurring theme) and the friendlier and cozier they are will law enforcement, the harder it is for anyone to tell a police officer “no” on any given case.

In larger counties these relationships tend to be more at “arms length.”  That means there is greater separation — frankly for no other reason than it is impractical for everyone to work out of 3 or 4 offices on the same floor.

Again, there is nothing wrong with prosecutors having a close working relationship with law enforcement to include advising them, assisting them in attaining things like search warrants, or training them on courtroom procedure.  The problem comes when there is virtually no separation and over-fratinization.  Smaller counties struggle with this more probably for no other reason than their community is more tight-knit.

Appeals Courts

An appeal should also be a cross-check on local authority.  Chances are the appeals judge is somewhere else and can lend an outside view to what happened in the trial court.

The problem with appeals courts is when they become rubber-stamps.  In Texas in most instances they only affirm or deny the conviction and the sentence.  Texas judges are elected.  I joke with juries if they ever see one run on a platform of “I’ll be easy on crime” to please let me know so I can go oppose that judge in the next election!

Attitudes Towards Police

Urban counties have bigger problems with citizens trusting police.  Prosecutors in those jurisdictions probably need to choose their battles wisely.  Rural prosecutors can be more aggressive in cases where there may be issues about police conduct because their jurors may simply be less critical of police.

“Napoleon Complex”

I sometimes get the impression rural counties feel like they have something to prove to outsiders.  I acknowledge these may just be my feelings which doesn’t make them proof of anything.  Still, it is an impression hard to shake in some instances.

The Bottom Line

There is clearly an objective and provable difference between rural and urban criminal justice.  The statistics just don’t lie.

If you ask ministers of justice in third-world countries they will all tell you how they are “tough but fair.”  But the only check and balance they have is their conscience.

Our prosecutors and judges consciouses can be the largest check and balance too where our institutional checks and balances become eroded.

I wonder if this is what we’re seeing.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For legal advice about any situation you should contact an attorney directly.