Received a big box at work today and didn’t have the faintest idea what it could be. Since it was addressed to me, I opened it up, and tada… two bottles of wine.

It was a thoughtful gift from Houston DWI lawyer Mark Bennett. I had done some local co-counseling of a DWI/POM case here in Austin for a client he was representing. Mark did all the heavy lifting; I just went along for the ride.

Of course, Mark didn’t just send me any 2 bottles. They were from an Australian vineyard and named “The Guilty” and “The Innocent”. I read the label of “The Innocent” first:

The Innocent is produced from a single vineyard. Due to its limited production only a lucky few will ever get to taste it.

Aha. Clever commentary on the sometimes overwhelming and unfair advantage the State brings to bear on those it chooses to criminally accuse? Expecting something equally clever, I read the other label.

Apparently only the “lucky few” will get to taste that one too.

As for Mark's case? Well, the only disappointment was that after several settings on the jury docket the State eventually offered his client a deal that was too good to refuse: dismiss the DWI outright, plead to a lesser offense, no conviction (12.45) for the marijuana, and backtime credit, no probation, no community service, etc.

I had hoped to learn a thing or two by sitting second chair on the voir dire, if not the whole trial. Oh well. Maybe next time. And thanks for the tipple, Mark.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

…is a bad idea.

I won’t link to it, but I just ran across an attorney’s web page that I hope was not written by him. (N.B. It was not an Austin lawyer.)

The website first acknowledges that in today’s world you need to drive: work, school, church, groceries, etc., and that one of the consequences of a DWI arrest can be loss of driver’s license, and then the attorney advertises that he will:

“effectively argue your need for a license at the ALR hearing”

In other words, hire me, and I’ll let the judge know that your license shouldn’t be suspended because you really need it.

Excuse me? Are you – that is, the lawyer, not the client – are you serious?

It’s not uncommon for clients to suggest that I should stress to the Administrative Law Judge that they really need their license, and perhaps if we demonstrate exactly how much they have to drive that they can avoid a suspension. Alas, I have to disabuse them of the notion that the ALR process is concerned at all about their essential need for a license; that’s what an occupational license is for, and those aren’t issued at the suspension hearing, or even by that type of judge.

Now it’s likely that the lawyer didn’t write the webpage content himself (see examples of comment spamming by marketers on blogs here and here). But you’d at least think he would have read it by now.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Following my post on the criminal defense lawyer’s dream juror comes an Austin American Statesman article “Internet aids trial lawyers doing background checks on clients, jurors”. What caught my eye of note towards DWI defense was this bit:

Sometimes the drunken-party photos are sufficient. Jurors whose Facebook page reveals a certain fondness for Sixth Street's nightlife or appreciation of the local music scene tend to be sympathetic to her DUI clients, said Mary Ann Espiritu, an associate with Chris Dorbandt & Associates.

Stories about the government digging up information about criminal defendants and using their online postings against them are becoming increasingly common. Of course, most of the time a defense attorney keeps or strikes a juror because of something they posted to Facebook or on their blog no one will be the wiser. Kudos to Eric Dexheimer of the Statesman for exploring this less publicized aspect of internet research and the law.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Here’s a good reason – if you needed one in the first place – not to shop for lawyers on big referral sites. This gem comes from ZipcodeZ.com. Bear in mind that they are supposedly trying to sell you on the value of using one of the lawyers that has paid to be listed on their site:

At first glance, it may seem like a lawyer who represents drunk drivers is the biggest slime ball on the face of the earth, but the truth is not that simple.

“Notthat simple”. Apparently it’s close. But not quite accurate. Later on we learn that…

…on the slimier side of things, DUI lawyers can and do get cases thrown out of court when the police or the prosecution fail to follow procedure. While it may seem horrible that actual drunk drivers go unpunished, it is important to keep in mind that all citizens have rights whether or not they have broken the law.

True. Plus here’s a big one you left out: some folks that get arrested for DWI aren’t actually guilty because they weren’t intoxicated.

That’s what happens when police departments institute an arrest-everyone-and-sort-it-out-later policy.

[Update: Taking a look at the lawyers listed for Austin in this particular internet directory I’m actually fairly certain that not all of them – and perhaps none of them - are paying for this listing. Still the point remains the same. That is …assuming I had one.]

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks (1)