America's Criminal Defense

I am not a medical doctor, so I do not have specific medical knowledge to add to criminal cases related to Shaken Baby Syndrome; however, as an observer, I can tell you that everytime a child dies or is injured the authorities look very closely at the case. This was not always true in years gone by, as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) or some other complication was often listed as the cause of the death or injury. I am referencing cases in which the infant is to young to communicate or where there is no communication due to the death.

The current process is often very much the opposite in that the authorities seem to go to a great extent to manufacture a criminal case against an adult (usually parents, family, or a care giver.)

Considering that the adult in question is often in a state of panic or hopeless dispair, you can imagine what kind of statements the authorities come up with. In refering to authorities I mean doctors, nurses , hospital personal,

Often clients will call our criminal defense law firm in a state of complete confusion because they do not understand how either they or some friend or family member is being accused of murder. Very often the cause of this confusion occurs when the prosecution applies the Felony Murder Rule to the circumstances of the case. This rule holds, in general, that whenever a death results from any felonious activity, the resulting death may be held against the perpetrator of the felony crime. Thus, a murder charge becomes the consequence.
 

The Brian Banks case out of California brings into light one of the ugly problems that many criminal defense attorneys deal with all the time. The fact is that many of the defendants accused of criminal sexual behavior are in fact innocent. In the aforementioned Brian Banks case, the defendant plead to a sex crime charge, on the advice of his attorney, in order to escape a possible 41 year sentence. In taking the plea he was sentenced to 6 years in prison, parole, and was required to register as a sex offender.

The problem was that Banks did not commit the crime. Later, after he was released from prison, the victim recanted her earlier testimony and eventually Banks' conviction was reversed and he was exonerated.

Justice eventually was served in this case, but at t

The U. S. Supreme Court last week ruled that attorneys are to be held to the same stardards of legal professionalism in negotiating and or handling plea offers as they are in handling trials in criminal cases. Since the great majority of criminal cases come to a resolution by a plea bargin rather than by a criminal trial, due to the vast numbers of plea cases, one would expect that a great number of appeals would arise from the holdings in these cases. In fact, Justice Scalia noted that the judicial system will be inundated by appeals as a result of these cases. (Justice Scalia voted with the minority in the cases.)

While the two cases under review, Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, were somewhat different in the facts presented, the result is that in handling a plea, whether it is accepted or rejected and the case goes on to trial, the attorney has duties he has to perform. The criminal attorney must present all plea offers to the client and fully explain both the

Often when reviewing a case with our clients we have a situation where a client is being accused or investigated for a crime, but the crime has not yet been charged. In this situation we almost always advise that we be retained to handle a prefile defense of the accusation or investigation. Many attorneys advise clients to wait until they are charged and then come back. We think this is not sound advice in most criminal cases.

A prefile defense case is all about timing and positioning. It is only effective, in most cases, if the client immediately retains a criminal lawyer upon discovery of the accusations or investigation. By definition if the case has progressed to a charge, the prefile opportunity is forever lost.

What a criminal attorney attempts to do in a prefile defense can take a number of different forms. Among these forms would be: stopping the client from talking with the police or to anybody about the case, identifying witnesses and defense th

In most cases it is very bad to give an interview or to talk to the police or any other authority without your criminal attorney being present. The advice by most defense attorneys would be not to talk at all to anybody.

Now as to the Sandusky interview I do not have enough specific facts to know where his defense attorney is going with this, so I will not comment on it at this time. I would only say that I hope the criminal defense attroney has an overall defense plan that this interview will further, or it was a terrible idea.

Let me show you through some examples why talking is a bad idea:

Example 1. Person A, the victim, alleges that they confronted person B in the lunch room at work at 12:30 about a prior date rape by B. Person A says that B admitted the rape during their meeting. When B is confronted by the police, B "talks" and admits having met in the lunch room but denies admitting to the rape of A.

Example 2, Person

The case of Jerry Sandusky at Penn State shows all of us a lot about the nature and the fall out from a child molestation accusation. To begin with you have the trauma and grief to the victims and their families. You also have the battle between the defense attorneys and the prosecution attorneys concerning Mr. Sandusky's guilt and possible punishment. However, here you have much more than the above items.

In this case, the atheletic director and a school vice president are also charged with crimes for failing to notify and or pursue the alleged offender. Also, the school president and the head football coach lost their jobs as a result of the scandal. Also, I am sure that the university will suffer unknown damage as a result of all of this.

I don't know enough to comment on all of these issues, except on the case of Joe Paterno, and only then from what I have read in the press reports. With this being said here is what I think.

It seems fro

Many times as attorneys we assume that our clients have a more complete knowledge of the criminal justice system than they do. This often comes up when discussing with clients the differences between various types of charges.

For example, often clients have no understanding as to what is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony. This is a basic element that needs to be understood before moving forward on any case.

A misdemeanor can be defined as an offense for which the defendant can be incarcerated for up to one year (in most jurisdications). A felony is loosely defined as an offense for which the defendant can be incarcerated for more than one year to an unlimited time period such as life (in some jurisdictions the death penalty is available). Now both of these offenses can carry possible additional penalties such as probation, parole, fines, court costs, schooling, community service, restitution, registration etc. However, it is primarily the

Criminal cases present the client with difficulty at the very outset of the process of retaining a criminal attorney. Either the client is presented with the option of paying a flat fee up front for the entire case or paying a retainer fee with additional fees to be paid later as further services are needed. It might seem as if the latter would be the easiest and best way to retain a criminal defense attorney. In reality, the latter method often leads to a less than successful outcome in the case and many times a loss of the retainer fee paid with no positive gain for the client.

How does this happen? Too often, if the attorney is paid only a retainer on the case, his or her effort is only to produce billable hours against the retainer. Once the billable hours equal the amount of the initial retainer fee, the attorney feels free to separate from the client. For the client to have the best possible result in the case, the criminal attorney must be invested in the final ou

According to a USA Today article ("Caylee's Law" online petition builds interest after verdict), there are some that wonder if a law, such as Caylee's Law, is needed at all. Brevard Circuit Judge Preston Silvernail said this conversation would not be taking place if the jury had returned a different verdict.

"I believe there are existing laws dealing with aggravated child abuse, child abuse, child neglect including placing a child in harm's way so I am not sure a new statute is necessary," he said. "I know some may have believed the defendant guilty, but the jury selected by both sides and approved by the court made a decision based on the law, the evidence and their own experience."

What does that have to do with failing to REPORT the DEATH or disappearance of a child in a reasonable amount of time.

There was no actual evidence to pr