Aug 27, 2014 · Can a judge meet with a defendant who is represented by an attorney without the attorney present. A judge met with a friend of mines son in the county jail. The boy informed the judge that he was represented by an attorney. The judge required the man to sign papers without benefit of counsel. He , the judge, stated that he would not release the defendant unless he …
Jul 02, 2009 · If a lawyer lies to the Judge about something that is within his own knowledge -- such as something the lawyer did or didn't do during the lawsuit, then he can be suspended or disbarred. However, it's important to distinguish what you mean by a "lawyer lying" from examples when a lawyer is not really lying.
Jan 07, 2016 · Of course, this does not just apply to criminal defense attorneys; it can apply to any lawyer that has to appear before a judge in any case. There are two types of contempt proceedings: direct contempt and indirect contempt. Direct contempt involves improper conduct by a lawyer that is done in the presence of the judge so that the judge sees or hears it.
A judge who determines it is necessary to recuse him/herself will advise the parties and attorneys of the grounds for that determination, and will ask the court administrator to reassign the case to a different judge.
For the most part lawyers are considered advocates for their clients. They are expected to argue their client's side of the case.Many times what lay people consider perjury the court does not. In general lawyers are immune from what they say in the courtroom while representing a client. Perjury is when a witness not a lawyer is testifying falsely. A lawyer however can be sanctioned for misrepresenting facts to...
In general lawyers are immune from what they say in the courtroom while representing a client. Perjury is when a witness not a lawyer is testifying falsely. A lawyer however can be sanctioned for misrepresenting facts to... 1 found this answer helpful. found this helpful. | 0 lawyers agree. Undo Vote. Helpful.
There are two types of contempt proceedings: direct contempt and indirect contempt. Direct contempt involves improper conduct by a lawyer that is done in the presence of the judge so that the judge sees or hears it. An obvious example would be if the judge orders the lawyer to do something in court and the lawyer refuses to do it in court. Disruptive behavior in court can also be the basis for direct contempt. The other kind of contempt is indirect contempt. That involves the violation of a court order outside of the presence of the judge. For instance, if the judge orders the attorney to file a pleading and the lawyer intentionally fails to do so, that could be indirect contempt. A lawyer can go to jail for a contempt violation.
Finally, the judge did not have authority to put the criminal defense attorney in jail initially. Since direct contempt proceedings had not officially started, there was no legal basis to put her in jail at that time. Only after a legitimate direct contempt hearing with notice and an opportunity to present and question witnesses can a judge put a lawyer in jail for contempt.
It does not happen often, and I have only seen one case of a Jacksonville criminal defense lawyer being held in contempt, but a judge does have a right to hold a lawyer in contempt and send him/her to jail for a period of time for certain conduct in Florida. Of course, this does not just apply to criminal defense attorneys; it can apply to any lawyer that has to appear before a judge in any case.
The U.S. Supreme Court has gradually recognized a defendant’s right to counsel of his or her own choosing. A court may deny a defendant’s choice of attorney in certain situations, however, such as if the court concludes that the attorney has a significant conflict of interest. Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153 (1988). The Supreme Court has held that a defendant does not have a right to a “meaningful relationship” with his or her attorney, in a decision holding that a defendant could not delay trial until a specific public defender was available. Morris v. Slappy, 461 U.S. 1, 14 (1983).
Deprivation of a defendant’s right to counsel, or denial of a choice of attorney without good cause , should result in the reversal of the defendant’s conviction, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006).
Right of Self-Representation. Defendants have the right to represent themselves, known as appearing pro se , in a criminal trial. A court has the obligation to determine whether the defendant fully understands the risks of waiving the right to counsel and is doing so voluntarily.
The right to representation by counsel in a criminal proceeding is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The government does not always go to great lengths to fulfill its duty to make counsel available to defendants who cannot afford an attorney. In general, however, defendants still have the right to counsel ...
The U.S. Supreme Court finally applied the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to the states in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), although the decision only applied to felony cases.
Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “ [i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”. This has applied in federal prosecutions for most of the nation’s history.
A judge can appoint advisory counsel at the government’s expense to provide guidance to a pro se defendant and potentially take over the defense if necessary.
Judge's Relationship to a Party or Attorney. A judge's fairness and impartiality may be compromised when he or she has had a business or professional relationship with a party or attorney. In cases where the judge was a party's business partner or attorney, as well as in cases where the judge was a member of a law firm representing a party, ...
Judge's Relationship to a Party or Attorney. A judge's fairness and impartiality may be compromised when he or she has had a business or professional relationship with a party or attorney. In cases where the judge was a party's business partner or attorney, as well as in cases where the judge was a member of a law firm representing a party, the potential for bias or prejudice is almost always too great to permit the judge to preside over the case.
Bias or prejudice typically means the judge has acted or spoken in a way that prevents him or her from treating the party or attorney in a fair and impartial manner.
One of the key principles of the American judicial system is that the judge who presides over a case must be fair and impartial. In the vast majority of cases, the issue of the judge's fairness and impartiality never comes up. There are instances, however, when one of the parties in a civil case has reason to believe that the judge cannot be fair and impartial. Sometimes the judge recognizes his or her own inability to maintain partial. In those situations, the judge will either recuse himself or the litigant will move to have the judge disqualified from presiding over the case. Let's look at some of the circumstances that may lead to a judge's recusal or disqualification.
One of the key principles of the American judicial system is that the judge who presides over a case must be fair and impartial. In the vast majority of cases, the issue of the judge's fairness and impartiality never comes up. There are instances, however, when one of the parties in a civil case has reason to believe that ...
You're entitled to have an impartial judge preside over your case, but how do you know when the circumstances make recusal or disqualification of the judge a legal possibility?
Even a judge who is not serving as the finder of fact (i.e., when the case is to be decided by a jury) cannot be fair and impartial if he or she has personal knowledge of disputed facts, because the judge's evidentiary rulings (in pleadings and motions made by the parties) may be influenced by that knowledge.
The defendant will not always follow that advice because the defense lawyer has not taken the time to build a relationship at the beginning of the representation. The following are suggestions to foster the client relationship.
If a defendant decides against waiving the privilege, the defense lawyer may then assert the privilege on behalf of the defendant to shield both the defendant and the defense lawyer from having to divulge confidential information shared during their relationship. The attorney/client privilege applies only to communications between ...
The attorney/client privilege is an evidentiary rule that protects both defense lawyers and defendants from being compelled to disclose confidential communications between them that are made for the purpose of furnishing or obtaining legal advice or assistance . The privilege is designed to foster frank, open, and uninhibited discourse between the defense lawyer and defendant so that the defendant's legal needs are competently addressed by a fully prepared defense lawyer who is cognizant of all the relevant information the defendant can provide. The attorney/client privilege may be raised at any time during criminal proceedings, pre-trial, during trial or post-trial.
At all times during the representation the defense lawyer must communicate with the defendant to keep the defendant informed about the status of the case. The defense lawyer should send the defendant copies of all significant correspondence and other documents to advise the defendant of any significant developments relating to the case.
Formation of Attorney/Client Relationship. The attorney/client relationship is formed when the defendant seeks advice or assistance from the defense lawyer; the advice sought is within the defense lawyer's professional competence ; the defense lawyer agrees to render such assistance; and, it is reasonable for the defendant to believe ...
The crime-fraud exception is one of the oldest exceptions to the attorney/client privilege. The attorney/client privilege is ultimately designed to serve the interests of justice by insulating attorney/client communications made in furtherance of adversarial proceedings. The attorney/client privilege does not extend to communications made in connection with a defendant seeking advice on how to commit a criminal or fraudulent act; or a defendant's statement of intent to commit a crime. In nearly all jurisdictions defense lawyers can be compelled to disclose such information to a court or other investigating authorities.
Defense Lawyer's Duties to Defendant. The defense lawyer is obligated to hold strictly confidential all conversations and other communications with the defendant, including all information which the defense lawyer receives from the defendant during the course of representation. The defense lawyer must pursue the representation conscientiously ...
Where the circumstances permit, but do not require, the attorney to cease representation, the withdrawal is considered voluntary.The circumstances under which an attorney may withdraw mid-case include:
the attorney is not competent to continue the representation. the attorney becomes a crucial witness on a contested issue in the case . the attorney discovers that the client is using his services to advance a criminal enterprise. the client is insisting on pursuit of a frivolous position in the case. the attorney has a conflict of interest ...
When an attorney withdraws in the middle of a client's case, that withdrawal is usually categorized as either "mandatory" or "voluntary.". In this article, we'll explain the difference between these two processes, along with some examples of each. Keep in mind that with either type of withdrawal, the attorney usually needs to ask for and obtain ...
withdrawal would materially prejudice the client's ability to litigate the case.
the client is refusing to pay the attorney for his or her services in violation of their fee agreement. the client is refusing to follow the attorney's advice. the client is engaged in fraudulent conduct, and.
The attorney must cooperate with the client's new counsel and must hand the client's complete file over as directed. An attorney who has withdrawn from representation has a continuing professional obligation to maintain the confidentiality of all matters within the attorney-client relationship, so for example the attorney cannot become ...
Even where withdrawal is mandatory, an attorney must first seek and obtain the court's permission before ending representation in the middle of a case.
If the court knows there’s supposed to be a lawyer there and the lawyer isn’t there, they’ll try to contact the lawyer. (That’s happened to me several times, though not usually as a result of my “forgetting” the case; the more typical scenario is I was in another courtroom and didn’t get the message anyway, but they did try.) The court will generally continue the case sua sponte, though the judge might be torqued at the attorney for causing the delay.
If neither you nor your attorney show, the consequences to you could be arrest (in a criminal case) or dismissal of your case if you are suing someone in civil court, or loss of the case if you are a defendant in a civil case.
User-10101980509374502950 is correct: if you're in a non-criminal case where your lawyer does not appear, your first move would be to ask the court for a continuance, i.e., that your hearing be moved to a later date/time. Given the explanation that you've hired counsel who simply has not appeared, many (though not all) judges are likely to grant the continuance (or at least give you some time to make a phone call and figure out what’s going on, etc.) so long as you haven't delayed the proceedings significantly in the past. Some judges will actually get on the phone and personally call late counsel--believe me, no lawyer wants to be on that call. I’ve been in court when it’s apparent that a lawyer just flat out forgot about a particular hearing, and even the friendliest judges tend to read counsel the riot act under such circumstances.
If you appear in court and the attorney fails to appear, you should ask for a continuance based on absence of counsel. This will almost always be granted. However, a judge could be difficult and assign a public defender to represent you at that moment and direct the case to go forward.
In those rare instances in which the attorney’s appearance will substitute for the defendant’s appearance, the failure of the attorney to appear, and you don’t appear, a bench warrant for your arrest will be issued for failure to appear in court at the date and time ordered. If you are out on bail and fail to appear in court, the failure to appear cancels your bail and a warrant for your arrest will issue. If you appear in court and the attorney fails to appear, you should ask for a continuance based on absence of counsel. This will almost always be granted. However, a judge could be difficult and assign a public defender to represent you at that moment and direct the case to go forward. This would be highly unusual in all but a minor offense, such as a traffic offense, in which a conviction would not result in jail time, but only a fine.
Lawyers are human, and they oversleep/get stuck in traffic like everyone else, but if you are running late for a hearing, the procedure is to call the judge's chambers and let someone know why you're late or cannot appear, not to leave the client to fend for him/herself. Promoted by Ramsey Solutions.
Contact your State Bar Association and tell them you want to report this incident. They may have a form for you to fill out. If so, get it, complete it, and submit it with a copy of your letter to the attorney and all enclosures. If not, send them a letter telling them you are filing a grievance and enclosing a copy of the letter to the attorney and enclosures. A Bar representative may call you after you file your grievance for more information.
After both sides have presented their arguments, the judge or jury considers whether to find the defendant liable for the plaintiff's claimed damages , and if so, to what extent (i.e. the amount of money damages a defendant must pay, or some other remedy). Depending on the type of case being heard, a civil trial may not necessarily focus only on ...
When a civil lawsuit involves multiple parties (i.e. where three individual plaintiffs sue one defendant, or one plaintiff sues two separate defendants), attorneys representing each party may give their own distinct opening arguments.
The plaintiff presents the facts of the case and the defendant's alleged role in causing the plaintiff's damages (or reasons to find for the plaintiff) -- basically walking the jury through what the plaintiff intends to demonstrat e in order to get a civil judgment against the defendant. The defendant's attorney gives the jury ...
Except in cases that are tried only before a judge (i.e. most family court cases), one of the first steps in any civil trial is selection of a jury. During jury selection, the judge (and usually the plaintiff and the defendant through their respective attorneys) will question a pool of potential jurors generally and as to matters pertaining to ...
Whether a witness is called by the plaintiff or the defendant, the witness testimony process usually adheres to the following formula: 1 The witness is called to the stand and is "sworn in," taking an oath to tell the truth. 2 The party who called the witness to the stand questions the witness through "direct" examination, eliciting information through question-and-answer, to strengthen the party's position in the dispute. 3 After direct examination, the opposing party has an opportunity to question the witness through "cross-examination" -- attempting to poke holes in the witness's story, attack their credibility, or otherwise discredit the witness and his or her testimony. 4 After cross-examination, the side that originally called the witness has a second opportunity to question him or her, through "re-direct examination," and attempt to remedy any damaging effects of cross-examination.
A peremptory challenge can be used to exclude a juror for any reason (even gender and ethnicity in civil cases), and a challenge for cause can be used to exclude a juror who has shown that he or she cannot be truly objective in deciding the case.
Because the plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant's legal liability based on the plaintiff's allegations , the plaintiff's opening statement is usually given first, and is often more detailed than that of the defendant.
Selection of the Court-Martial Jury. The commander gets to choose the members of the jury, called the court members. Theoretically the commander is supposed to either know, or interview, the court members before they are selected. In practice, what often happens is the staff judge advocate selects the court members.
The commander gets to choose the Article 32 hearing officer, select the court members (meaning, the jury), and decide whether the case should go to trial. Your commander may also seek to influence the trial proceedings through the staff judge advocate. This sort of influence is still unfairly impacting court-martials trials, but two changes have lessened the power of commanders to do so. One is the fact that your defense counsel is not appointed by your commander but by an independent trial defense service, and the other is having a judge who is independent of your unit to preside over the proceedings.
Most courts-martial end with a conviction and proceed directly to the sentencing phase. Sentencing is called "extenuation and mitigation." At this stage, you get the chance to present witnesses and evidence to show yourself in a positive light. If you haven't had a trial but have instead pled guilty and proceeded to the sentencing phase, your defense attorney may have had a chance to strike a deal with the prosecutor. For example, the prosecutor could agree to a less severe sentence when you agree to plead guilty. But the jury won't know about this sentencing deal, so they might give you an even lighter sentence than what you previously agreed to.
If you haven't had a trial but have instead pled guilty and proceeded to the sentencing phase, your defense attorney may have had a chance to strike a deal with the prosecutor. For example, the prosecutor could agree to a less severe sentence when you agree to plead guilty.
Article 32 Proceedings (Probable Cause Hearing) Article 32 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides you with the right to have a probable cause proceeding before a general court-martial trial can be conducted. This is a hearing conducted by an Article 32 hearing officer. The prosecutor must present evidence showing probable cause ...
The Military Rules of Evidence govern what evidence can be submitted during the trial. Any evidence that the judge rules to be excluded by these rules cannot be considered by the jury. The member of the jury with the highest rank is normally appointed as the foreman (called the president).
A two-thirds vote is required to find you guilty. In a civilian court, the failure of a jury to agree unanimously usually creates a hung jury and can lead to a second trial, but the rules are different for courts-martial juries.