The Government's Press Conference - A Slam Dunk

I know I'm supposed to blog about the Supreme Court ruling in Florida v. Powell today, being from Florida and all. So here: I thought it was a silly case.

Now on to a pet peeve.

Yesterday in Miami, a well-known forensic accountant/lawyer surrendered to the FBI on charges of wire fraud. Word of the raid on his office came months ago. Everyone knew this was coming.

After he surrendered, his charging document was released. It was an Information, not an Indictment. Now to the non-criminal lawyer crew reading this - an Indictment is required in all federal cases, unless the defendant waives the right to an Indictment. A defendant only waives that right because he is going to plead guilty.

So it's the perfect resolution for the gub-mint. Investigation, surrender, guilty plea, sentencing. No preparation for trial, no interviewing of witnesses, no motion hearings, no litigation. Just a plea, and sentencing, and a bunch of cooperation (usually) that will help get victims paid and maybe others charged.

And this is what the government wants.

And of course they responded in kind:

"We appreciate the defendant surrendering as promised to these charges of wire fraud. No one is above the law, not lawyers, accountants, and especially those responsible for obtaining money for victims as trustees. We appreciate the defendant acknowledging his wrongdoing and look forward to advocating an appropriate sentence for his crimes."

Actually, they didn't say that.

As the Miami Herald reported:

Both the U.S. attorney and top FBI agent in South Florida slammed the 60-year-old Freeman, a familiar figure in Miami's legal and business circles, for violating the ``fiduciary trust'' of creditors and the courts.

"This is a classic case of how greed can slowly corrupt a person who started out with good intentions,'' said John Gillies, the FBI's special agent in charge. ``It turns out that the wolf was protecting the hen house for the last 10 years."

Great, name calling.

The guy committed a crime. He's taking responsibility for it. He's going to prison. If that is the chronology the government wants defendants to follow, what is the point of driving in the stake? What is the point of using the powerful bully pulpit to "slam" the defendant?

These press conferences are precious to the government. Defense lawyers try, unsuccessfully, to negotiate them out of any deals. That request is always met with wide eyes, and "absolutely not."

It's not as important to let the public know that this is the type of post-investigation conduct the government wants from defendants - acceptance of responsibility, contrition, cooperation.

It's more important for them to be able to express how they feel about the defendant as a person.

It's all about the slam.

For whatever reason.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court, and the author of The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer.



Post to Twitter

What Are Criminal Defense Lawyers Really Worth?

A lively discussion took place in the comments section of the post below regarding fees in criminal cases.

Seems an anonymous police officer takes some pity on defendants he arrests, because they will later encounter bankrupting criminal defense lawyers who are not sensitive to the fact that "most" people cannot afford to hire them.

I have always believed that the demise of respect for lawyers has had much to do with the fact that we charge "a lot" of money for our services. There is the old notion that a "rich" person is someone who makes $1 more than you. If that's true, then someone who makes thousands more than you, is certainly the devil.

There is no sense trying to discredit the notion that those who can afford to hire expensive lawyers get better justice. Public defenders that win impossible cases are not written about as much as when the "marquis" lawyer wins a case. Sure, a defendant with money can afford to hire experts, investigators, and lawyers who don't have volume practices and can afford to put in more time to a case. But it's not always the case that the defendant with the most money, always wins.

The question in the title of this post is one that clients don't like to answer. It's always OK when a personal injury lawyer writes a letter, makes a couple phone calls, and resolves a case for $100,000, taking $30,000 for himself. It's OK because the money doesn't come from the client, technically.

But when a client who gets arrested and is told he will be fired if he is convicted, is asked to pay five, ten, twenty, fifty, a hundred thousand dollars to defend the case - it is then that the criminal defense lawyer is seen as unsympathetic. Don't we "understand?"

Truth be told, there are clients who understand that for the most part they have one shot to defend their case. There are those same clients who understand that a good lawyer costs good money, and that private lawyers are not public defenders. We don't work for free, and we don't have the luxury to tell our staff, landlord, investigators, mortgage companies, grocery stores, court reporters, or anyone else we pay bills to, that we are taking a break from charging fees because certain people believe we should be more sensitive to the fact they were arrested.

No one has an obligation to hire any attorney, and no attorney has an obligation to charge what the client can afford. If it's not worth it to you to hire the lawyer you are talking with, find someone else. My anonymous officer friend says $6,000 is a lot of money for a DUI case. To someone making $30,000 a year, it may be. To someone making $250,000, it may be pocket money. To someone fearing losing their job and wanting to do whatever they need to do to defend the case in a proper fashion, it may be a "bitter pill," that must be swallowed.

It always amazes me when I speak to a client about their life. I will hear them tell me about their job, their obligations, their insistence that they "can't" go to jail. It appears that they are serious about representation, until they hear the fee. And it's not just my fee. Often I will talk to a client who tells me they came to see me after being quoted an "outrageous" fee from another lawyer. When I hear the fee, I'm in shock - not at the fee, but at the low number.

My anonymous officer friend talks about setting up a system like health insurance. A client pays a small co-pay, I guess, and the rest is paid by the insurance company. Sounds good, just find me an insurance company that wants to bankroll criminal defense fees, and a lawyer that wants to take the fees that the insurance company will pay.

I spent 20 years in school. I've been practicing 15 years. I did my work as a public defender, and I still, to this day take court appointed cases in federal court, and when I see a need, help a client out.

But this is my profession. This is how I feed my family. If you can't afford me, pick up the yellow pages, go to Google. You'll find "reasonable fees," and "affordable payment plans" all over the place.

This is America, you are free to hire the lawyer of your choice.

Hopefully it's someone who values your case, as much, or more, than you do.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court, and the author of The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer.



Post to Twitter

The More Things Change, The More Potential Clients Stay The Same

When I first started in private practice, I'd go anywhere to represent someone. I'd drive hours to a courthouse, or meet a client at a convenient place. I went to some interesting places.... Now, a few years later, most meetings are in my office, most cases, close to home.

But then there was last Thursday. A frantic mom called from her home a few hundred miles away - her son, a college student here, was arrested on some serious drug charges. Coming to my office was going to take some serious work, as he had no car and was waiting on a friend to take him back to campus after being recently sprung from the county jail.

So I looked at my schedule and realized that I was soon to head out of town for a conference, and drive right by the college.

"I'll go see him there."

Why not. Nothing wrong with going back to your roots and doing things you haven't done in a long time. It keeps you grounded.

So I went to the college and spend some time with my potential client. Interesting case, nice kid. He tells me to tell mom to hire me.

Now about an hour late for my drive out of town, I call mom and explain the situation as I know it to be and quote her a fee. She doesn't seem fazed by the fee and says she'll get back to me after talking to dad.

This was Thursday.

Today, Monday, I learn who the judge is, and send a message to mom letting her know about the judge and asking whether I should proceed on the case.

"I was going to follow up to let you know that your fee schedule was not affordable so we retained another attorney. My apologies for not calling. Thank you."

First, she was never going to call. We all know that. No one calls back unless they are hiring you or are of that rare breed that want to pay you for your time (that real, real rare breed) or just have that sense that saying "no thanks," never killed anyone.

Second, she violated rule 6 of my ebook: "Be honest with the lawyer. Tell him you want to hire him (if you do) and the details of your financial situation. You just told this lawyer you were plastered, picked up a hooker, stole something, or shot someone. This is not a time to be coy, or shy. Admit you are poor, broke, or need time to pay the fee. Tell the lawyer what you can come up with right now, today."

I also say in my ebook to "not negotiate," but that's mutually exclusive of telling the lawyer "hey, this is what I can afford" and letting the lawyer decide they really want the case, for a different price.

So after I made my house call (my first and last house call this year thank you lady for ruining it for everyone) and calmed her fears, she called another lawyer or 4. A lawyer who didn't go see her son, but gave her the "number" she wanted, got the case. She wasn't looking for a lawyer, she was looking for a fee.

I just hope she got both.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

How Many Innocent People Are In Jail, Right Now?

Scott Greenfield reports this morning on the Innocence Project's announcement of the 250th exoneration of an innocent person. This one was convicted when I was 7, and left prison on parole when I was 12.

We as criminal defense lawyers read about exonerations and react. We shake our heads, we get angry, we roll our eyes when our friends express amazement that an innocent person was in jail, that a prosecutor fought their release even after DNA cleared them, and we wonder how many else there are.

We also hear the deafening silence of the vast majority of the public who don't care.

There are those, you know, that consider this the cost of doing business. They're apologists for the "imperfect system. I'll never forget watching a guest on a TV talk show say that if 1% of the people executed were innocent, that would be a pretty good stat - 99% being guilty.

The problem here is not that 250 people have been exonerated, the problem is that we don't know how many innocent people will spend yet another night in jail, for something they didn't do.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

The Slippery Slope Of Bond

A couple weeks ago there was a tragic accident. A bicycle rider was killed. The suspect, left the scene, and was later arrested. The allegations, not formally filed yet, include driving on a suspended license and DUI.

Miami has a big bicyclist community, and they are vocal. This accident was more than a story of car v. biker, it became bikers v. government, bikers v. not enough safe places to ride, and now, bikers v. criminal justice system.

The suspect appeared before a judge, and was released on bond.

In the local paper appeared this letter in response to an editorial on the issue of bicyclist safety:

The writer should focus some of his outrage on the system and the judge who allowed the perpetrator to bail out of jail. The man who allegedly hit the biker and left the scene was driving while under the influence. He had an invalid license and resisted arrest.

He obviously had no respect for the law. Where is the outrage?

The outrage is there, but letters to the editor aren't as sexy as commenting on the internet where anonymity allows people to say things they would never say, to anyone. A letter to the editor requires a name. Who wants to put their name to something when they can leave it out and write things that incite hate?

The sentiment is typical - how can someone who did this, be given bond after arrest and be allowed to walk out of jail? Why is a conviction required for a defendant to be kept in jail?

Well, it's not. Bond has become more the exception. Legislators have been adding offenses to the "no bond" schedule throughout the country. Few an accused murderer is released on bail, add to that armed robbery, burglary with an assault, a few other violent crimes, and don't forget the judge's discretion to set a high, unaffordable bond when the defendant is a flight risk, and/or has little ties to the community.

People like me talk about the "slippery slope." Bond has slid down this slope at a fast clip.

The top of the slope is here, the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution (don't laugh, it really exists):

"Excessive bail shall not be required."

Then there is Florida Law: Article I, section 14 of the Florida Constitution reads:

Unless charged with a capital offense or an offense punishable by life imprisonment and the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption is great, every person charged with a crime or violation of municipal or county ordinance shall be entitled to pretrial release on reasonable conditions.

This is a hard pill to swallow for many - the fact that the public thinks "he did it" and that "he's guilty" and the fact that a judge must follow the law and grant bail, is outrageous to some. I understand.

But this is where public sentiment and law and order diverge.

If we left all aspects of our system up to people emotionally affected by crime, or accusations of crime, there would be a jail on every corner.

I understand the sentiments of the author of this letter, and I hope he understands that while the judge many not have made the ruling he, and other bikers like, he did follow the law, as slippery as it has become.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Why Nothing Will Ever Change In Criminal Justice

Two stories hit the internet over the last week or so. One was about the FBI breaking wiretapping laws. The other was that 500,000 people are currently incarcerated awaiting trial at an annual cost to taxpayers of 9 billion dollars.

Yawn.

That was the collective response of the nation.

Sure, we've got Haiti on our minds, the Super Bowl's coming up, American Idol is starting a new season, the iPhone may be available to other carriers besides at&t soon, and the two stories I mentioned dont play well on "Law & Order," or with the Law & Order crowd.

But these two stories put the nail in the coffin on the issue of whether anything will ever change in the criminal justice system.

Nothing ever will, change.

We have a love/hate relationship with crime. We love watching white trash after white trash being arrested on Cops. We love watching everyone get convicted on the 12 different Law & Orders. We are numb to the fact that local news is nothing more than a few top stories of crime and punishment, and then something about a dog, or cute kid, and don't even realize that we are addicted to something we hate - crime.

I know, this is about the time someone says "but if there was no crime, you wouldn't have a job."

Yes, I would. I'd find something else to do. We all would. Cops, prosecutors, judges, we'd all do something else.

But we have a society that is spending money we don't have to make us all feel "safe."

For every lawyer, judge, civic activist, or casual courthouse observer that laments the explosion of criminal statutes, explosion of the number of people in jail, and lack of priority in the system - there's a group of police officers and angry mothers that demand we stay the course.

Leadership in state legislatures, where most of the thoughtless legislation on criminal justice is created, is basically non-existant. The goal of a legislator is singular - to remain a legislator. No one gets elected, or stays elected, by touting significant change in the criminal justice system - unless its more laws, more jails, and more people in those jails.

California's jails are at capacity at 100,000 inmates. They currently have 170,000. No one cares. Eventually a federal judge will pen an order requiring the jails to release inmates. Until then, California will do nothing. They can't. It would take thought, courage, and leadership. That doesn't exist anymore.

Whenever numbers are thrown out regarding the amount of non-violent drug offenders in our jails, there's another group calling those numbers "lies." Legislators cower in committe rooms when 20 uniformed police officers show up and sit in the gallery. They are there for one reason - to let the elected officials know that if they do anything - anything that disturbs the apple cart - they will be targeted as "soft on crime," and they may lose their seat.

We don't care that the FBI was or is illegally wiretapping phone conversations. From Joe Six Pack and his wife, to the typical suburban family who "have nothing to hide," wiretapping conversations is OK. These are the same people who "don't care if cops want to search my house." These are also the same people who want a cop fired for giving them a traffic ticket.

As for all the people awaiting trial at a cost of 9 billion a year - that's too big a number to think about. The average family doesn't have 9 billion dollars, and they don't think they are paying towards that number. They just know that the damn garbage fee keeps rising a few bucks a year.

As long as people continue to go to jail, and stay there, that's just fine with everyone. Disagree? Walk around any judicial fundraiser where there's non-lawyers and others outside the system and you'll hear the clamoring of "you gonna keep those criminals locked up - right?" That's what people think judges do.

So they do.

We've lost any sense of how to deal with the criminal justice system. In Florida last year the prosecutors asked that no new criminal statutes be enacted.

They heard crickets.

One after the other they came - more laws, more increased sentences, no thought at all.

And we just keep going.

We have determined that there is no solution. We deal with the line of innocent people released from prison with shrugged shoulders. Then we watch our legislators fight to keep the exonerated from receiving a dime.

We give cops power, and when that power is abused, we give them more.

We hear that certain laws arent working, so we tinker with those non-working laws to make them more impossible to deal with.

Our prisons have too many people that don't belong there, so we put more people there.

And so it goes....

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Haiti

Being a resident of the city containing the largest population of Hatians outside of Haiti, I thought while putting on my suit, drinking a nice cup of coffee, getting in my nice car with air conditioning and leather seats on my way to my nice office from my nice house, I'd post this photo of the aftermath of yesterday's earthquake in Haiti taken by Carel Pedre of the Associated Press:



And this:



And this:

Donate to the Red Cross.



Post to Twitter

The Continued Criminalization Of Drug Addiction

I see Redmond O'Neal is back in jail - having failed to stay clean during a 24 hour holiday pass from his residential drug treatment program.

Redmond is of course the son of actor Ryan O'Neal and Farrah Fawcett. Those that watched the documentary on Fawcett's battle with cancer saw Redmond say goodbye to her in chains and a jail jumpsuit during a furlough.

Redmond apparently can't stay clean, and now he may go to prison for 6 years.

He's not a drug dealer, he's just addicted. He belongs in treatment - treatment his family can well afford. Instead, he'll be sentenced to prison, get little help, and on the taxpayer's dime. I know the critics will say "well what about someone who can't afford treatment, should they go to jail for addiction?" No. If only a real study on the cost and benefits of treatment as opposed to jail would cause our "leaders" to think differently about where to put addicts, as opposed to dealers.

And I understand, he was on probation. There has to be consequences to violating probation. Testing positive for drugs is and should be an instant violation.

But what's the solution?

We live in an age where jail is the solution to everything, even for a guy like Redmond O'Neal who is only hurting himself. (Yes, I know he "broke the law").

California is broke, yet a drug addict is possibly on his way to prison for years - for addiction.

The judge made an interesting comment to Redmond in court. He said "It actually strikes me that you haven't got a clue as to what recovery means. It is a lifelong commitment and it's grinding, hard, painful work."

I don't think the problem is that Redmond doesn't have a clue. I just don't think anyone in the system has a clue.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Shooting at Vegas Federal Courthouse Pisses Me Off

I have to tell you that I take for granted the security in federal court. I never think twice about someone coming in with a gun, mainly because my keys and blackberry get a nice pat down upon entrance, and the scanner beeps when the only thing I have on me is my shirt and pants. Must be the tie.



This haunting video, is not really a video, but the sound of a day in court when some angry litigant, angry over the dismissal of his social security case, decides to get his own form of sick justice. This was yesterday, in Las Vegas Federal Court.

Today at every federal courthouse security will be a little tighter. People will get a second look, maybe a third. There is no correlation between what happened in Las Vegas yesterday and federal court anywhere else. People get angry at the grocery store, at the post office, and at work. But it's like when someone with a shoe bomb tries to blow up a plane, well, you know the rest.

We (those who go to court) all have to deal with what happened yesterday. It will happen again, we all know that. But because we cannot stop a sick, angry litigant from sneaking in with a gun, a shotgun, we have to at least pretend we can. The gunman was dressed in black. Watch "no black" be the next addition to the dress code. We can only sigh and understand that this is the world in which we live.

It angers me that today I have to mourn the death of a Court Security Officer, a retired cop now one of the guys in blue jackets that waive familiar lawyers through, and say "how you doin' today counsel?" A guy who just "went to work" right after the new year, and left the courthouse dead. Five seconds before he was probably talking to a prosecutor, defense lawyer, or fellow security officer about his New Year's vacation, or the weekend's football games.

Pisses me off.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

New Decade: New "Attorney As Government Informant" Story

“Posing as a criminal attorney to get a defendant to talk ‘freely' of his criminal past screams of entrapment and will turn the U.S. justice system on its ear if this is allowed to happen.”

That's not the statement of a criminal defense lawyer, prosecutor, or judge. It's the statement of defendant Shannon Williams.

According to Omaha World-Herald reporter Todd Cooper, that's exactly what happened.

More than 30 times this year, investigators say, Shannon Williams orchestrated a multimillion-dollar marijuana ring from inside the Douglas County Jail.

In one-on-one sessions with a jail visitor, Williams would use the visitor's cell phone to call associates and instruct them on how to divvy up the gobs of marijuana and money his operation was taking in.

He would confide in the visitor about his past exploits, claiming he had earned $15 million to $20 million while operating the marijuana ring in Omaha. He would ask the visitor to launder the money he was making. And he would use the visitor's cell phone to try to arrange hits: one to beat up his longtime defense attorney and another to “put a few into the back” of an Omaha man who had been messing with Williams' girlfriend.

All the while, the visitor would take it in, nodding and promising to follow Williams' orders.

The informant, the one that went to the jail to arrange the 30 drug deals, is a lawyer.

Fellow Omaha attorney D.C. “Woody” Bradford, in his 42nd year of practicing law says he's “shocked that an attorney was willing to do it.”

Not surprisingly the defendant was a bit taken aback: “An FBI (informant) posing as my attorney!!!” Williams wrote. “I still can't believe it!”

The article has the full story.

Here's the bombshell:

Williams said he had retained Haddock for several matters, including a lawsuit Williams filed to try to expose disparities in crack cocaine sentencings.

Stuck, the agent, disputed that. (Read: important defense evidence, dispute.)

Williams, who was acquitted in the 1993 murder of an Omaha man, said Haddock's “betrayal” has left him unsure whom to trust. At last week's hearing, Williams could be overheard asking if his new attorney “was an undercover agent, too.”

So begins the decade, so comes another snitching lawyer in the criminal justice system. Sadly, the government will fight like hell to prosecute this case, and even more scary, a judge may allow it. (I expect some to say there is nothing "legally" wrong with this tactic.) I don't think it will become commonplace, unless the Bar morally collapses, but it will happen again (It's happened before). All the government needs is one case to say it's ok.

That a lawyer, a former lawyer of a client, would agree to this, is the most pathetic thing I've ever seen. Period. I hope this lawyer is out of business, and disbarred.

Colleagues, prepare for this:

"Hi, I'm your lawyer."

"Prove it."

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

A Criminal Defense Lawyer's New Year's Resolutions

I resolve:

To my clients:

[1] To never concern myself with your attempts to make me believe that somehow I am responsible for your current situation.

[2] That I will listen to you when you tell me what your lawyer friend in New York said about your Florida case. Once.

[3] That I will continue to tell you what I think, regardless of how much it may bother you.

[4] That I will continue to meet all my obligations to you, as long as you meet all your obligations to me. This isn't about money. It's about being on time, showing up at a scheduled meeting, getting me that witnesses' name and phone number that "saw everything," and returning phone calls.

[5] That I will continue to cut you off as soon as you begin the "isn't prosecuting me a waste of taxpayer's money," crap.

[6] That I will continue to be the one in our relationship who decides whether "this is a good case" for me, and whether it's a "simple case."

[7] To continue my policy of not rescheduling a missed initial consultation (save for emergencies). One of the best decisions I've made.

[8] To continue to quote "ballpark" fees over the phone in an effort to prevent a wasted hour of being told that "this is a good case" for me, and that it's a "simple case," and I should basically do it for free, because you have no money, and you're innocent, and the government is out to get you and, well, you know.

To judges:

[1] That I will always call when I am going to be late to your courtroom, and appreciate you doing.......nevermind. Next.

[2] That I will "file a motion" for the unbelievably simple thing I am asking for that no one cares if you grant. I just ask that.... you read it.

[3] That I will respect your vacation schedule, time needed for family obligations, need to be out of town for conferences, and the fact that you have other cases you need to get to. I just ask that...... You know, this section is not getting very far.

Let's try:

Prosecutors:

[1] To stick to my code of ethics, especially the part that requires me to give you a free shot to not be the horror that everyone claims you are.

[2] To continue to abide by whatever I tell you, in writing, over the phone, in court, in the bathroom, cafeteria, or ballgame. I trust you'll do the same.

[3] That while we are both "just doing our jobs," I will never tell you that I am "just doing my job." Because people who say that are usually in the process of pissing someone off.

[4] Even if you are a complete jerk, I will continue to never object to a continuance because you need one for personal reasons. Everyone has a car accident, fight with their wife, family member sick, kid issues, and just generally the need for time off. Everyone.

[5] I will continue to respect that your job is different than mine. You do the same, please.

Fellow members of the criminal defense bar:

[1] I will continue to not disparage public defenders, ticket lawyers, DUI lawyers, lawyers who only represent clients charged with petit theft of food on a Tuesday night when there's a full moon, or any lawyer who is competent to accept representation of a person whose liberty is at stake. I will continue to get business because of who I am, not because of what I say about you.

[2] I will always let you cut in line at the podium. Even if you say no to me because you "gotta get somewhere." I have no problem quietly making you feel like a putz.

[3] I will continue to never accept a referral fee from you. Just take care of the client for me.

[4] I will continue to act as if we are all on the same team, even if you don't conduct yourself that way.

Non-criminal defense lawyers:

[1] I will continue to practice law like a human being. You want a confirmatory letter - write it yourself. Threaten me with trial - just tell me when. Give me unreasonable deadlines, they'll be ignored.

[2] I will continue to be respectful when I tell you that I could care less about your civil case against my client. Really, I could care less, but I wish you luck.

[3] I will continue to be respectful when you tell me how good your civil case is against my client. If it is that good, you should win. Again, good luck.

Happy New Year.



Brian Tannebaum is a criminal and Bar defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Charlie Brown Terrorist Has Linus' Blanket Taken Away

On September 10, 2001 that some dude tried to light some liquid with a syringe and caused a small fire on board an airliner would have been an interesting story.

That it happened after September 11, 2001, makes it a 24 hour "developing" "unfolding" story affecting everyone traveling throughout the world, or thinking of traveling throughout the world.

Terrorists have one goal - fear. After September 11, 2001, that goal was met. We are in fear, permanently. As evidence, we spent the last 8 years hearing people support an American President for one main reason, the perception that he "kept us safe." As another example, there is rarely a candidate for office these days that does not tout "public safety" as their number one goal.

We are unsafe. Believe it, join the chorus. It's generally all we care about, or so we are told.

So over the holiday weekend some 23 year-old Nigerian student and son of a banker allegedly tries to blow up a plane bound for Detroit during the last hour of the flight. He fails miserably. And here come the buzz words - "Yemen," "Al-Qaida," "Terrorist."

He'll be tried, convicted and sentenced to life. That's the beginning and end of the discussion of the criminal defense angle of this story.

As more information was learned this weekend, more buzz words - "blankets," "pillows," "no taking a leak within one hour of landing."

Now I'm going to assume that this Charlie Brown terrorist went to the airport, had his one carry on and one personal item, took his shoes off, took his jacket off, had his boarding pass in his hand, showed his ID 4 times in 5 minutes, had his 3 ounces of liquid in a clear plastic bag, took his laptop out, and had his seat back and tray table locked and in their upright position upon take off.

But he caught on to a major security flaw - the ability to go to the bathroom within the last hour of flight, had have a blanket and pillow on his lap.

What were we thinking?

Now that's all gone.


Last hour of flight - no blanket, no pillow, and hold the bladder.

After spending the weekend hearing about this new "safety" policy, I finally heard someone say it - FOX's Greta Van Susteren said the policy was "almost insane." Fascinating to hear that on a network that spends most of it's time accusing the new administration of coddling terrorists and rolling back the War on Terrorism. The response to her comment was that a pilot thought it was done for the sole purpose of:

"Doing something."

And there we have it.

After the failure of the "shoe bomber," we were handed the policy of taking off our shoes and carrying small amounts of liquids in a clear plastic bag.

At the time, Comedian Bill Maher said something to the effect that one day someone with a blue hat would attempt a terrorist act on a plane, and the result would be a prohibition of blue hats on airplanes.

Our new policy of no blankets, pillows, or pissing in the last hour of flight, is that ridiculous. Why not include that Nigerian students that have bankers as parents are prohibited from flying?

On a holiday weekend where we were led to believe we were again "unsafe," our leaders had to "do something." And they did.

Just one question.

What if he tried to blow up the plane at the beginning of the flight.

Exactly.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Maricopa County Rallies

They came, they spoke, they rallied.

Jeff Gamso, who I believe has owned this story in the blawgosphere, has the story here.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Going The Maricopa County Lawyers Rally Today?

Certain events cause a groundswell, or as we call them in internet language "go viral."

That lawyers in Maricopa County, Arizona, have had enough and will meet at the courthouse today to show their solidarity, is unfortunately not one of those events.

I wonder why.

Googling this event brings up a few blog posts, and a brief clip from the Phoenix New Times.

I checked the website again for the Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, but their event calendar doesn't mention it.

This is a bad time to expect a big crowd at any event, other than a holiday party or deep discount flat screen TV sale, but I do hope that the lawyers of Maricopa County, civil, and criminal, take their lunch hour and drop by the rally.

Having a large number of lawyers attend this event will make a big statement.

Having a small number of lawyers attend makes a bigger statement.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

The Constitution Makes An Appearance In Federal Court

There is too rarely a case in the criminal justice system that causes the collective public to react in amazement at what really goes on in the "no cameras in the courtroom" federal courts of America. I have always said that the reason cameras are prohibited in federal courts is because the government does not want people to see "what really goes on."

This order, my bedtime story last night, will have three reactions. The public will read in amazement that this conduct occurred, defense lawyers will cheer the judge for bringing to light a tactic as common as the sunrise, and prosecutors will call it an "isolated indident."

As usual, Scott Greenfield woke up earlier than me today and said it best.

Read the order. Make copies for your friends. If you haven't send holiday cards, send this instead. And read Scott's post.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

A Voluntary Surrender Becomes Another 6 a.m. Knock On The Door

A little while ago, while dreaming about nothing, thinking about nothing, and enjoying a rare sleep past 4 or 5 a.m., I heard it - the slight vibration on my nightstand.

The caller ID said it all.

It was the client promised a voluntary surrender months ago, weeks ago, and hours ago when the prosecutor called me yesterday late afternoon to say "it's time."

We agreed that this middle aged man charged with "white-collar" fraud would today walk himself into the jail at 11 a.m. It was all he wanted from the beginning of the representation. He knew he would be arrested, and he just wanted to surrender. From day one my first conversation with the prosecutor ended with "of course, no problem."

At least he now got a free ride, I guess.

Faithful readers of this blog, and those who spend more than 5 minutes with me talking about the criminal justice system know that this is a major pet-peeve of mine.

This time, I don't blame the prosecutor, I blame the cops.

Rule #1 or maybe 2 in criminal law is that when there is a warrant, there is an arrest. There is no explaining that it was issued in error, there is no nothing. A warrant means an arrest, period. In 15 years I've only had one client not arrested on a warrant (that I can remember) and it was a juvenile whose case was dismissed, and instead of that being entered into the record, a warrant issued and the cop was kind enough to give me a couple hours to go to court to clear it up with the judge.

But that was it.

This morning was the typical mindless script:

Cops come to door, client jumps in shower. Wife runs downstairs with me on the phone and says "he knows he's being arrested, he was told by the prosecutor (whose name is mentioned) to be at the jail at 11 a.m. We know the bond is $______, can you talk to his lawyer, he's on the phone?

The response was equally mindless: Deny knowledge of name of prosecutor (whose been there for many years and is well known), announce that "we have an order from a judge to arrest him," ignore that the person on the cell phone seems to know a great deal about this, (including when the cop said "the bond is," the wife said the exact amount), and at 6 a.m. is likely actually a real, living and breathing defense lawyer, and refuse to speak to me.

The cops relied on the rules, and to them, I'm just some scumbag defense lawyer who is trying to break them - probably trying to see if I can get my client out of the country on a case that he's known about for months and hasn't as much left his neighborhood.

So today will go like this: My client will get out, the prosecutor will apologize and tell me he never meant for that to happen. He may even contact the Sheriff's department, but probably not. No need to ruffle feathers with your friends. I'll write a letter to the Sheriff which, if responded to, will say that "I must understand" the seriousness of the task, and basically everyone will point fingers, if they even bother to use the energy to do so. Someone got arrested today, someone is in jail, that's all that matters. The public is "safer" because my client was picked up 5 hours before turning himself in.

It seems like the more I practice, the less I get this voluntary surrender down to a science. We live in an endless bureaucracy of "nobody told me," and "I didn't get the memo," and those will be the excuses that fly today.

And so recently I've begun to counsel clients to forget about voluntary surrenders and worry more about the case. Cops and prosecutors use voluntary surrenders as leverage and if the client "doesn't care," the leverage is gone. If the voluntary surrender happens - great. If not, let's move on.

Everyone did their "job" today. The prosecutor agreed to the surrender, the cops made their 6 a.m. arrest. The human component of all of this is buried under notions of defendant's fleeing the country, and an unwillingness to trust anyone, or even listen.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

The Arizona Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers Is Here For You, Somewhere

After learning about the rally next Monday in Maricopa County, I began discussing the situation with a lawyer over there.

I had a basic question - what is the collective criminal defense bar doing?

I heard crickets.

Then: "I think there's been a couple comments in the paper."

I was also told I "didn't understand" the environment there, that lawyers were scared.

That's scary on various levels.

So I took a gander.

I checked out the Arizona Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, (called Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice.

There it was! A link - "What has AACJ done for me lately?" Here, is where I was going to read what the association was doing about events in Maricopa County.

Except it was written by the president 12 months ago.

OK, well, Sheriff Joe was up to his antics 12 months ago - let's see what it says:

"The concerning part is that AACJ is as needed as ever: the county attorneys grandstand, the legislature panders, and the courts cower. Indeed, the same people who ask why we are relevant in almost the same breath recognize we are needed. So, what are we going to do?"

Yes, since that exact situation is going on now - what are you going to do?

Here's the call to action:

In the next year (editors note: meaning right now) this question should be both our focus and goal.

So, let's begin to tell people what we have done for them lately and what we are going to be doing in the future.

There being no update on the website on this mission for this year, I went to the next best section - "News."

No question what's going on now in Maricopa County is news.

Here's the latest news on the website:

Apr 21, 2009
U.S. Supreme Court Limits Vehicle Searches Incident to Arrest

So OK, maybe they're not on top of it when it comes to the web, but how are their members receiving information from an association that wants to "begin to tell people what we have done for them lately and what we are going to do in the future?"

I extend an invitation to the AACJ to provide me any information on their participation in recent events in Maricopa County and I will post it here. I'll also encourage my fellow blawgers to do the same.

Where are you AACJ? What are you doing?

Tell us.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

The Lawyers Of Maricopa County Announce A December 21st Rally

I received the following e-mail today from a lawyer I know and who is a co-organizer of this rally:

On December 21, 1946, the United States Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Irene Morgan for refusing to give up her seat on a bus in violation of Virginia's segregation law. This is just one example of the courage of one person standing up against power wielded with evil, unjust, and self-serving intent. I personally do not plan on sitting down any more in the face of this incompetent, thin thinking, petty little tyrant. On Monday, December 21, 2009, at 12:15 p.m., I would like to rally as many people as we can to the patio in front of the Central Court Building to protest the illegitimate, despicable, and cowardly actions of Andy Thomas and to demand that he be suspended from the State Bar of Arizona. Please circulate this email to as many people as you see fit.

(I am not the author of the e-mail but I am passing this on and I will be there. I wanted to let those of you who have written to me about your sympathies for our troubles here in Maricopa County that we are not sitting around anymore.)

Denise M. Quinterri

We'll be watching.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Maricopa County: An American Embarrassment

I've watched, but other than posting the video, haven't written about the garbage coming out of Maricopa County, Arizona. I've left it to those who have taken this deflated and disgusting ball, and run with it. Those like Jeff Gamso, who has marvelously written on the disaster that is the judicial system in Maricopa County.

After yesterday's "indictment" of Judge Gary Donohue, I just can't take it anymore.

This, is a disgrace, playing out daily, and evidencing who is really in charge over there.

Cops.

I'm glad this is all happening. Really, I am.

Because this issue of who really runs our judicial system, everywhere in America, is rarely discussed.

Walk into any legislative committee hearing on criminal justice and you'll see it - a smattering of prosecutors, defense lawyers, maybe a judge or two, and then rows and rows of uniformed police officers. One will speak, 25 will be there for effect.

There is no question but that our "first responders" - police, fire, ambulance, need the support and funds of elected officials. But since 9/11 everything has changed. Whatever power police ask for, they usually get. Blind support of law enforcement's desire to pull over more people for more reasons for more searches is what gets votes. The public is tired of crime, and tired of talking about civil rights.

So Judge Donohue held a police officer in contempt. He asked for an apology. He got an indictment. An indictment, signed by the county attorney. This is no longer about justice, it's about taking sides. It's about the cops versus the judges, lawyers versus judges on the issue of police power, and citizens divided on how they feel about their most trusted fellow citizens, cops. No surprise that there are those who didn't know cops couldn't just pilfer through a defense attorney's file in court. There are those who think the defense lawyer should be sanctioned for representing someone who would write a letter that would raise the suspicion of the police. (Not really, but you know what I mean).

In the end, this dust up will cost the taxpayers of Maricopa County, Arizona, millions.

It's time for the feds to swarm in here. This is getting out of hand.

No, it's gotten out of hand.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com



Post to Twitter

Ben Kuehne Wants To Say Thank You

BENEDICT P. KUEHNE
In Grateful Appreciation of the
Overwhelming Community Support of his Innocence

Invites the Community to his
APPRECIATION RECEPTION
On the Occasion of his Vindication

Sky lobby
Bank of America tower
100 S.E. 2nd Street
Miami, Florida 33131
Thursday, December 10, 2009
5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.
RSVP to: RSVP@kuehnelaw.com



Post to Twitter