Re: discharging an attorney- hey Prairie Dawg

More | Report Post

On 1/21/04, El wrote:
> Hey Prairie Dawg, I appreciate you responding, but you haven't
> answered several questions....Are these 2 attorneys engaging in
> unethical behavior? Should they be replaced? Reported?
>
> person #1: What does "motion in arrest of judgement" mean? Can
> she withdraw her plea WITHOUT firing her attorney? [He wasn't
> court appointed]. Don't you think he's a dirty dawg for
> pressing her to sign the plea,then saying "You know, they
> really didn't have anything on you."?! The plea was for charges
> that she wasn't guilty of, like distribution and conspiracy,
> when she was not involved in that aspect. [She did use the
> meth, however.] And she tried to get her husband to stop. What
> does the law say a spouse should do in this situation?
> Couldn't she plead guilty to drug abuse? Aren't pleas usually
> for LESSER charges?

Moption in arrest of judgment is how you withdraw a previously
entered guilty plea and you don't have to fire your lawyer to do
it.

If she pled guilty to to a crime she did not commit that is a
fraud on the court and she could be prosecuted for perjury.
A lot of people think, well, I'm in the same house and I know
somebody's business but they can't PROVE anything on me....but in
most cases intent is inferred because nobody will ever admit they
know anything about anything.

I really only have your word for what occurred as between the
lawyers and the defendants. It may be the basis of an ineffective
assistance of counsel appeal but as long as what they did did not
substantially effect the outcome there's no basis on which an
appeal would fly. If a criminal defense lawyer is breathing it's
probably enough to survive an ineffective assistance of counsel
appeal. In any event, if the facts are as you suggest an appeal
might get a new trial which could result in the same outcome.

>
> person #2:I should clarify....the DEA & prosecutor did NOT make
> any deals in exchange for his info on the murder. It was a
> horrid, gruesome, grisly murder and he felt that the family
> should know what happened and the punks get punished for it.
> He did what he thought was morally 'right' knowing he'd get
> nothing in return. The DEA & prosecutor decided not to
> pursue 'kingpin' charges on him, but he's still at a 42 for
> federal sentencing. Do you think his attorney did the right
> thing by leaving him alone with the pack of wolves, I mean the
> DEA team? Does it sound like the attorney, who represented one
> of the snitches, had a conflict of interest and couldn't stay
> in the meeting with the DEA? What kind of 'collateral damage'
> are you refering to? Thanks-El

If this person is so moral, why did they wait till they were
jacked up before coming forward? Of course they thought they'd
get something out of it. That's what criminals do-they try and
sell anything and anyone out to lighten their load.

Collateral damage-the results of his ratting out someone
else....can come back in many different ways. Say, he rats
someone out and they then rat him out or they've got friends
where he's going? Uh huh....the old mafia guys knew the value of
keeping their mouths shut.

Believe me, what the lawyers allegedly did or did not do is the
very least of your friend's problems. Big deal...so you report
them to the disciplinary authorities and at most the lawyer gets
a nastygram....

Re: discharging an attorney- hey Prairie Dawg, 2/18/04, by v.

Legal Ethics Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST