Two More Dallas County DNA Exonerations

January 4, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

Dallas County is expected to exonerate the longest-serving prisoner shown to be innocent through DNA evidence this week.  Cornelius Dupree Jr., and Anthony Massingill were wrongly identified by a rape victim in 1979.  You can read about it here.

Yet again we see themes common to many of these cases.  Bad eye-witness testimony, failure to presume people innocent, and and decades of indifference.  Dallas has had the single most exonerations in America.

*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 specific legal advice on any matter you should contact an attorney directly.


What You Can Expect from the New Collin County District Attorney’s Administration

January 3, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

Greg Willis is the new Collin County District Attorney as of January 1, 2011 and he replaces the embattled John R. Roach, Sr. in that capacity.

I get asked a lot by clients what exactly that may mean for their particular case and in most circumstances the answer is probably nothing major.  That’s not to suggest that Mr. Willis’ administration will merely be a continuation of Mr. Roach’s regime… because it most certainly will not be.  But the truth remains that Mr. Willis inherits an office with probably 80% of the same prosecutors who take the same systematic approach to everyday cases such as DWI, drug possession, and theft.

The changes I predict we’ll see are broad policy changes impacting how the prosecutors manage their cases.  For instance, under Mr. Roach’s administration, the State would not allow the defense lawyer full access to the file unless the defense lawyer waived valuable rights.  Now, Collin County joins Dallas and Tarrant Counties that have an ‘open file policy’ and allow the defendant free access to the State’s file.  While the former administration believed in hiding part of it’s case to gain a strategic advantage over people accused of crime — the new administration believes that the truth is the truth and isn’t afraid to show it’s hand.

Other examples of changes we may see is doing away with some of the minimum plea offers on certain charges.  Under Mr. Roach’s administration, the prosecutor handling cases such as drug possession with intent to distribute were bound to offer a minimum of 15 years in prison.  While this makes for good politics in being tough on crime in Collin County, it resulted in many needless trials of bad cases where the accused was youthful, tangentially involved, or were “dealers” that lived at home with their parents and had little or no affiliations with real drug dealers.  While there’s been no announcement — it  is believed prosecutors will have more discretion in disposing of these types of cases.

There will likely be changes as well made to the intake procedures, grand jury procedures and deferred prosecution programs.  The impact of those changes will take time to gauge.

From the lawyers perspective, Mr. Willis changes are very welcome and long over-due.  Perhaps the biggest changes will be that the personnel changes made should eliminate the ‘circular firing squad’ which has embroiled the DA’s office which was responsible for many fruitless grand jury investigations of public officials, the indictment of Judge Suzanne Wooten and employees of the district clerk’s office.  Even the former first assistant Greg Davis was indicted in the after-math and wake of the legacy of outgoing DA’s Office.

Everyone in Collin County is ready for the dust to settle.  That should start now.

*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 specific legal advice on any matter you should contact an attorney directly.


Does The Alleged Victim in an Assault Case Need a Lawyer Too?

November 16, 2010

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

I get asked this question from time to time, so today I’ll try and answer it.

The short answer is maybe.  In virtually any assault case, the main evidence comes from the alleged victim who almost always gives a statement to police either at the scene of the arrest or at the police station.

Alleged victims are often later asked to give statement in subsequent proceedings whether it is in trial, statements to a prosecuting attorney, or by signing affidavits of non-prosecution requesting that charges be dropped.  Statements which are inconsistent with the original statement given to police can give rise to criminal liability to the victim.

Texas Penal Code 37.08 covers false reports to police officers and states in relevant part, “A person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive, he knowingly makes a false statement that is material to a criminal investigation and makes the statement to… (1)  a peace officer conducting the investigation; or (2)  any employee of a law enforcement agency that is authorized by the agency to conduct the investigation and that the actor knows is conducting the investigation.”

In a nutshell, it is possible that where an alleged victim makes a statement to law enforcement down the road in a case which reveals that they weren’t being truthful at any point of the case when dealing with police or with prosecutors… then the alleged victim themselves can have criminal exposure.

False reports to police officers are class b misdemeanors and carry a punishment of up to 180 days jail and a $2,000 fine.

Also, the attorney representing the accused in an assault cannot also give legal advice to the alleged victim.  This is because there is a very clear conflict of interest for the attorney who represents the accused’s best interests — and has no ethical or legal obligation to protect the alleged victims interests as well.

If you’re the alleged victim in an assault case or domestic violence case in Texas, you may want to seek legal counsel if you have any questions about your rights and representation if so needed.

*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 specific legal advice about any particular case or situation you should directly consult an attorney.


Weak Judges vs. Strong Judges

November 3, 2010

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 369-0577

The trial judge calls many of the crucial balls and strikes at trial including on which jurors are chosen to sit on the panel, what evidence the jury may hear, what arguments the lawyers may make, whether the case even makes it to the jury, and what formal instructions are given to the jury.  While some judges see their role as a referee on the sideline — for better or worse — they play a far more important role.

If the Judge makes mistakes in their rulings — those can be appealed.  Here’s why that’s not as easy as it sounds; (1) appeal can be extremely expensive if you don’t qualify as indigent; (2) the appeals courts rarely over-turn what happens in the trial court and often label the trial judge’s mistakes as “harmless error;” and (3) appeal takes a long time which means if you’re convicted at the trial court you may be serving probation or be sitting in jail waiting for the appeals court to look at the trial judge’s mistake (though you may be able to post an appeal bond).

For better or worse, I categorize Judges into two categories: weak and strong.  Weak judges guess at the law and try to make “safe” rulings which won’t get them appealed.  They often gravitate towards the prosecution because the feel safer ruling in their favor on close issues.

Strong judges know the law and aren’t afraid to disappoint the prosecution or the defense for that matter.  Because strong judges give more predictable rulings, their dockets tend to be more efficient as a whole.

*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 on any specific case or matter you should directly consult an attorney.


Jury Trials vs. Judge Trials

October 14, 2010

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy F. Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

Here is the equation as to how any criminal trial in Texas works.  The proper law + the facts = the verdict.

Judges always determine the appropriate law to apply.  Then the facts are applied to the law to reach the verdict.  A jury determines the facts, but if both parties agree — then the judge can determine the facts instead.  The latter is a known as a “bench trial” or “trial by Court” which is commonly known as a “TBC” in the courthouse.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant a right by jury trial.  Generally speaking its the defendant’s choice whether to choose a judge or a jury.  Texas prosecutors have recently asserted that the State of Texas also has a right to a jury trial as well… and therefore, they argue, that the only way the parties can have a TBC is by agreement.  Their assertion is largely unchallenged even though it’s legally unclear.  Practically speaking, then, both parties agree to waive a jury.

Here’s a practical example of how a jury trial works — in an assault case where the defendant claims self-defense, the Judge will conduct the trial, impanel the jury, and decides what evidence is legally admissible.  Once the evidence is concluded, the judge will decide (1) if the evidence legally sufficient to support a conviction; (2) if the defendant legally raised self-defense; and (3) what jury instructions to give so that the jury understands how to decide the facts.  The jury then deliberates and reaches their verdict based on the jury charge.

For a TBC, the Judge merely listens to all the evidence, rules on objections, and then renders a verdict — often without much deliberation.

There are tons of variables to consider if you’re presented with the option of waiving a jury and asking a judge to decide the case.  The Judge’s history and reputation and obviously the strength of the case must be considered and weighed against the local jury pool.

Judges prefer TBC’s because they’re far more efficient than jury trials.  They’re far quicker, generally less formal, and don’t involve having to manage a jury pool.  Just because judge prefer it, though, doesn’t make it the right choice.

After all, a criminal defense lawyer isn’t in the rights waiving business!

*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 case you should consult an attorney directly.