I know the title seems ridiculous, but hear me out....
When I left my job at a large firm, it was with the idea that I was leaving to become a criminal defense attorney. After all, that is why I went to law school in the first place. The whole big law firm thing happened because, after never having made more than $8.00/hour in my life, it was hard to turn down a guaranteed six-figure salary. However, my heart was never really into the corporate practice and I was always looking forward to leaving and becoming a criminal defense attorney.
The ironic thing, however, was that when I left the firm, most attorneys I talked to were telling me that I couldn't sustain a practice limited to criminal defense. They were saying that I would have to do some family law or personal injury to stay afloat. So there I was - I had left the firm to become a criminal defense attorney and now, everyone was telling me that, while I could practice criminal defense, it would have to be as part of a general practice.
I didn't really give the comments much attention at first. I assumed that these attorneys were basically saying that if I wanted to make a lot of money I would have to expand my practice. I wasn't as concerned about making a lot of money, as I was developing as a criminal defense attorney and as such, I tended to brush off such comments. However, as I started making my forays into the courtroom, I noticed that there were quite a few prominent criminal defense attorneys handling cases in other areas of practice (e.g. divorces, PI cases, civil lawsuits, etc.). I began to believe what others had been telling me.
As a result, not too long after I got out on my own, I started taking on some civil litigation. At first, the civil stuff was the only retained work I was getting. My criminal practice was primarily limited to court appointments. Since that time, as my criminal practice has grown to occupy a majority of my time, I have given serious consideration to the idea of eliminating my civil practice. I want to do this for a couple of reasons.
For one, I am somewhat worried about taking on cases in multiple areas of the law. The one thing I did like about big firm practice is that it allowed you to specialize in one area of the law. It gives you a certain confidence to know that you are qualified to handle most issues that will come up in the area you are in. I don't know that I can keep up with all of the goings-on in criminal law and other areas of the law. I also worry that by trying to keep up with these other areas, I will be taking time from developing my criminal practice.
My other primary concern is that I've noticed that I just don't have the same motivation or drive when it comes to my civil cases. I always seem to place my civil cases at the bottom of my priority list. I worry that this lack of motivation will catch up to me eventually and one of my clients will suffer for it. I just don't feel that my civil clients get the same effort that my criminal clients get.
All that being said, I am still worried about getting rid of this part of my practice. I don't know too many attorneys in San Antonio or the surrounding area that have the luxury of maintaining a criminal defense-only practice. There are a few, but all of those I can think of are the prominent attorneys. Did they start out having to take civil cases as well? Am I jumping the gun and trying to specialize too quickly?
Advice? Suggestions?
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Friday, April 11, 2008
Let's Me Get This Straight, My Kid is a Felon...?
As I've developed my criminal practice, one of the most rewarding aspects of my practice is juvenile defense. Why is it so rewarding? In my opinion, many of our courts are overzealous when it comes to juveniles. I know that the probation officers, prosecutors, and judges mean well and feel as if they are teaching a juvenile a lesson by being strict, but when kids are getting tagged as felons for tagging, the system is indeed overzealous.
If I can keep a juvenile from being labeled a felon or being put on probation over some mistake they've made, I feel like I've given that kid a second chance. I'm not saying we shouldn't hold kids responsible for their actions and I'm not saying that serious offenses don't warrant intervention and punishment from the state. My concern is that we are bringing kids into the criminal justice system for things that were previously handled within the home or within the school. I worry about the effect of getting so many kids into the system at such young ages.
Fighting at school is a good example. When I was growing up, if you got into a fight at school, you got detention (at school, not at a juvenile facility) or maybe, suspension. Now, thirteen year-old kids are taken into police custody and end up in court. As a result of their dispositions in court, many of the kids will end up on probation, with a probation officer checking in on them every so often. All of this for a fight at school.
The other problem that I have with the juvenile system is that in many of the cases that I see, it is the parents that should receive punishment, and not the kid. I've seen parents who know their kid is smoking marijuana is his room and yet, the parents do nothing. I've seen kids in court for violations of conditions of probation (curfew is a common one) and it was the parents that allowed the juvenile to violate the condition. Who gets punished? Not the parent who allowed Timmy to walk the streets at 11:00 pm with his friends. It's Timmy, for not being able to refrain from doing something his parents said was OK.
I once had a young girl (14 years-old or so) who was on probation for Possession of Marijuana and she had violated the conditions of her probation. As part of her probation, she had a curfew and a no contact order with her boyfriend. She would consistently violate both conditions. Her boyfriend was 19 and when she violated the conditions of probation, it was because this 19 year-old man would come over and take her out at all times of the night. She would sneak out of her window, act like she was staying at a friend's house, etc.
My problem with the case was - how can you punish a minor for being preyed upon by an adult? Basically, the state kept giving my client harsher and harsher punishment because she kept seeing this man. When I got her as a court appointed client and reviewed the file, I felt as if I was on crazy pills. Was I missing something? Who was the real criminal in all of this and who really deserved the punishment? My argument was that the state was essentially punishing her because she was being unduly influenced by an adult and that the state was holding her responsible for the actions of her adult boyfriend. After all, she's a minor. Can we expect her to refuse the callings of an adult who claims he loves and cares about her? My argument fell on deaf ears in court and once again, she had her probation modified.
I look back on her case and regret that I didn't do more for her. To this day, I truly believe she was a victim, not a criminal. And I failed her.
If I can keep a juvenile from being labeled a felon or being put on probation over some mistake they've made, I feel like I've given that kid a second chance. I'm not saying we shouldn't hold kids responsible for their actions and I'm not saying that serious offenses don't warrant intervention and punishment from the state. My concern is that we are bringing kids into the criminal justice system for things that were previously handled within the home or within the school. I worry about the effect of getting so many kids into the system at such young ages.
Fighting at school is a good example. When I was growing up, if you got into a fight at school, you got detention (at school, not at a juvenile facility) or maybe, suspension. Now, thirteen year-old kids are taken into police custody and end up in court. As a result of their dispositions in court, many of the kids will end up on probation, with a probation officer checking in on them every so often. All of this for a fight at school.
The other problem that I have with the juvenile system is that in many of the cases that I see, it is the parents that should receive punishment, and not the kid. I've seen parents who know their kid is smoking marijuana is his room and yet, the parents do nothing. I've seen kids in court for violations of conditions of probation (curfew is a common one) and it was the parents that allowed the juvenile to violate the condition. Who gets punished? Not the parent who allowed Timmy to walk the streets at 11:00 pm with his friends. It's Timmy, for not being able to refrain from doing something his parents said was OK.
I once had a young girl (14 years-old or so) who was on probation for Possession of Marijuana and she had violated the conditions of her probation. As part of her probation, she had a curfew and a no contact order with her boyfriend. She would consistently violate both conditions. Her boyfriend was 19 and when she violated the conditions of probation, it was because this 19 year-old man would come over and take her out at all times of the night. She would sneak out of her window, act like she was staying at a friend's house, etc.
My problem with the case was - how can you punish a minor for being preyed upon by an adult? Basically, the state kept giving my client harsher and harsher punishment because she kept seeing this man. When I got her as a court appointed client and reviewed the file, I felt as if I was on crazy pills. Was I missing something? Who was the real criminal in all of this and who really deserved the punishment? My argument was that the state was essentially punishing her because she was being unduly influenced by an adult and that the state was holding her responsible for the actions of her adult boyfriend. After all, she's a minor. Can we expect her to refuse the callings of an adult who claims he loves and cares about her? My argument fell on deaf ears in court and once again, she had her probation modified.
I look back on her case and regret that I didn't do more for her. To this day, I truly believe she was a victim, not a criminal. And I failed her.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
New DWI "Take Responsibility Program" in Bexar County
Even though my practice is focused primarily in smaller counties, every so often, I end up in Bexar County. As such, I was intrigued to hear about the new DWI program they are implementing down there. Bexar County is different from most of the other counties where I practice in that they don't offer pretrial diversion for a DWI first offense. I was interested to see what changes Bexar County would make in the way they handled DWIs. After looking at the particulars of the new program, I am not exactly sure that this will be a docket-clearing change.
Essentially, the program allows qualified defendants to plea to "Obstruction of Highway - Intoxication" and avoid a charge of Driving While Intoxicated. However, the deal isn't as simple as showing up in court, taking your Obstruction of Highway plea deal and going about your day.
To begin with, the defendant must plead within 30 days of the arrest (defendants with cases that are currently pending will have until May 16th to plead). Then, the defendant receives one year probation, unless the defendant's BAC is .15 or greater, in which case the probation is two years. As part of the probation, the defendant will have to have to submit to Ignition Interlock, Antabuse or SCRAM depending on whether the defendant owns a vehicle. A DWI education course is also required.
The benefits of such a deal appear to be that defendants will avoid an enhancement in the event of another intoxication offense. Another benefit that has been discussed is defendants not having to pay the $1000 DPS surcharge normally levied on DWI offenders. However, since the program is new, we still have to see whether DPS will refrain from enforcing the surcharge.
On the whole, I will probably refrain from recommending this deal to my clients until we all get a better understanding of the consequences of this new program.
Essentially, the program allows qualified defendants to plea to "Obstruction of Highway - Intoxication" and avoid a charge of Driving While Intoxicated. However, the deal isn't as simple as showing up in court, taking your Obstruction of Highway plea deal and going about your day.
To begin with, the defendant must plead within 30 days of the arrest (defendants with cases that are currently pending will have until May 16th to plead). Then, the defendant receives one year probation, unless the defendant's BAC is .15 or greater, in which case the probation is two years. As part of the probation, the defendant will have to have to submit to Ignition Interlock, Antabuse or SCRAM depending on whether the defendant owns a vehicle. A DWI education course is also required.
The benefits of such a deal appear to be that defendants will avoid an enhancement in the event of another intoxication offense. Another benefit that has been discussed is defendants not having to pay the $1000 DPS surcharge normally levied on DWI offenders. However, since the program is new, we still have to see whether DPS will refrain from enforcing the surcharge.
On the whole, I will probably refrain from recommending this deal to my clients until we all get a better understanding of the consequences of this new program.
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Out On My Own....
After three years of being locked in my office drafting research memos and "co-authoring" articles for partners, I decided to go out on my own. After leaving the confines of a "Big Tex Firm" life (goodbye Client Entertainment budget and goodbye house I really couldn't afford), I opened up a small criminal defense practice in a small community in South Texas.
Why criminal defense? I always wanted to be a criminal defense attorney. Hell, the only reason I went to law school was so that I could have my own criminal defense practice. My father has his own practice and does some criminal defense as part of his practice. Having grown up seeing what my father did, I knew I wanted to both have my own practice and to the extent possible, do nothing but criminal defense work. To be honest with you, I really don't enjoy too many other areas of the law and that became evident to me during my practice at the firm.
Now I am out on my own and doing what I want. However, at times, in my practice I feel as if I've been granted a wish from The Monkey's Paw. The work is more interesting, the people are more interesting, but the possible consequences of my actions are so much greater. When I was at the firm, if I made a mistake, a client might lose some money, or more likely, a partner might look bad in front of a client. Now, my mistakes may result in people losing their liberty. At the same time, when I do well, I know that my work has given some client their life back for a year or two, or ten.
Anyway, I hope this blog turns into a learning experience for both me and any reader that may happen to come across it.
Why criminal defense? I always wanted to be a criminal defense attorney. Hell, the only reason I went to law school was so that I could have my own criminal defense practice. My father has his own practice and does some criminal defense as part of his practice. Having grown up seeing what my father did, I knew I wanted to both have my own practice and to the extent possible, do nothing but criminal defense work. To be honest with you, I really don't enjoy too many other areas of the law and that became evident to me during my practice at the firm.
Now I am out on my own and doing what I want. However, at times, in my practice I feel as if I've been granted a wish from The Monkey's Paw. The work is more interesting, the people are more interesting, but the possible consequences of my actions are so much greater. When I was at the firm, if I made a mistake, a client might lose some money, or more likely, a partner might look bad in front of a client. Now, my mistakes may result in people losing their liberty. At the same time, when I do well, I know that my work has given some client their life back for a year or two, or ten.
Anyway, I hope this blog turns into a learning experience for both me and any reader that may happen to come across it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)