If you appear before a judge without a lawyer, and you were already advised to your right to counsel, a Judge could determine that you waived your right to an attorney and try you without counsel. On the other hand, a judge could give you a postponement to get an attorney. Why would you want to risk it though?
Full Answer
Feb 03, 2015 · Judge will ask you again what you want to do about having counsel. Ultimately, you could be forced to proceed without an attorney if you dont make a choice. You should be able to ask about plea offers as well at your next court date. If youre ok with the deal then you can act on your own. But Id suggest some legal assistance to help you out
Feb 05, 2017 · In 14 of the remaining 22 states, a defendant who receives a jail sentence from a non-lawyer judge has the right to seek a new trial before …
Yes sir, no sir, etc. Tell the judge you would like a short continuance so that you can hire an attorney. Most judges will give you time to seek counsel, especially if your case is not that old. Feel free to call me if you'd like.
Former judges who leave the bench when they’re still too young to retire have several options. One option is to return to practice and become a regular lawyer again. Another option is to enter the field of “private judging” and become a professional arbitrator.
Since you are already on probation for paraphernalia, this new charge of marijuana possession will be seen as a violation of your probation, so you should expect that there will be a hearing before a judge to determine whether to revoke your probation and sentence you for the original paraphernalia charge.
Happen to be up late and saw this. You have an awful roommate. I know, that isn't legal advice.#N#Call or text (314) 757-4861 after 7:30am. We'll see what can be sorted out. You need an attorney, obviously.
(1) To request permission to appeal when an appeal is within the court of appeals' discretion, a party must file a petition for permission to appeal.
Interlocutory appeal is a tool that circumvents waiting for the final decision of the district court, instead allowing direct appeal to the appellate court while the action is pending. This practice point illustrates the operation of Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 5.0, below. Rule 5. Appeal by Permission.
If that doesn't work, as a last resort you may need to sue your lawyer in small claims court, asking the court for money to compensate you for what you've spent on redoing work in the file or trying to get the file.
If you lost money because of the way your lawyer handled your case, consider suing for malpractice. Know, however, that it is not an easy task. You must prove two things:
If you're not satisfied with your lawyer's strategy decisions or with the arguments the lawyer has been making on your behalf, you may even want to go to the law library and do some reading to educate yourself about your legal problem.
Every state has an agency responsible for licensing and disciplining lawyers. In most states, it's the bar association; in others, the state supreme court. The agency is most likely to take action if your lawyer has failed to pay you money that you won in a settlement or lawsuit, made some egregious error such as failing to show up in court, didn't do legal work you paid for, committed a crime, or has a drug or alcohol abuse problem.
If you want to sue for legal malpractice, do it as quickly as possible. A common defense raised by attorneys sued for malpractice is that the client waited too long to sue. And because this area of the law can be surprisingly complicated and confusing, there's often plenty of room for argument.
But all states except Maine, New Mexico, and Tennessee do have funds from which they may reimburse clients whose attorneys stole from them.
As defined by ethical rules, a lawyer's duty to keep clients informed has two primary components: to advise the defendant of case developments (such as a prosecutor's offered plea bargain or locating an important defense witness), and. to respond reasonably promptly to a defendant's request for information.
The duty to keep clients informed rests on attorneys, not clients. But on the theory that if the attorney screws up it's the client who usually suffers, here are a couple of steps that defendants can take to try to secure effective communication with their lawyers: 1 Raise the issue early on. Establish, in advance, a clear understanding about case updates. If an attorney's practice is to initiate contact only when a development occurs, the attorney should communicate that to the client at the outset of the representation. If a client wants (and can pay for) regular updates regardless of whether developments have taken place, that too can be spelled out in advance—even included in a written retainer agreement. 2 Be reasonable. A defendant who phones his or her attorney with a request for information can indicate a willingness to speak with the lawyer's associate, secretary, or paralegal. The lawyer may be too tied up on other cases to return the call personally, but may have time to pass along information through an assistant. And because some lawyers have poor communication skills, the defendant may be better off getting information from an assistant than from the lawyer.
If you don't pay your lawyer on the day of trial, or however you have agreed to, then while he or she may be obligated by other ethical duties to do his/her best, they won't be motivated by sympathy for you, and it will show in court.
Tell the Truth. If your lawyer doubts you in the consultation, or doesn't think you have a case, while that may change over time, getting over an initial disbelief is very hard. You have to prove your case. Your attorney is not your witness. They are your advocate - but you are responsible for coming up with proof.
Well, truth be told, neither do I. The difference between lawyer and client is that the lawyer expects it to take a long time and understands. The client typically thinks it's unjustified. So, your hard truth is that each case takes time. Be patient.
While lawyers can certainly take your money and your time and we can file a case that will be very hard to win, if you don't care enough about your life to get a contract, the judge is not very likely to be on your side. At least, not automatically. Oral contracts are extremely hard to prove. What are the terms.
While juries usually get it right, sometimes, it's not about whether a particular matter is emotional or simple, complicated or straightforward. Sometimes people make decisions on who has the nicer suit, or who is more pleasant to deal with. So even if your case is good or even if it's not so strong.