A "defendant" is a general term used to describe a person who or an entity that has been accused of violating the law in some way. Unfortunately, this term commonly carries a stigma of someone who has done something wrong. However, it is extremely important to remember that a defendant has not yet stood trial, and thus must be presumed innocent.
Jan 17, 2017 · Give indigent defendants the freedom to choose their own lawyer. The basic premise is simple: rather than appoint an attorney for them, the state could guarantee reimbursement, within limits, to...
Another disadvantage of having a public defender is that the client does not have the choice of lawyer. The court appoints the lawyer. If the public defender is not satisfying the client, he or she may find it difficult to get a new public defender. Private Lawyer A private lawyer is someone whom the defendant or his or her family personally selects.
Apr 06, 2017 · Americans may take for granted that if they’re ever accused of a crime, they can choose their own attorney to represent them. The Supreme Court has ruled that Americans have a right to counsel in...
Everyone is not entitled to representation. The US Constitution only provides for a right to an attorney in criminal cases. Legal Aid handles only civil matters. Before a case is accepted the case must be determined to have legal merit and meet Legal Aid priorities.
Overview. The right to counsel refers to the right of a criminal defendant to have a lawyer assist in his defense, even if he cannot afford to pay for an attorney. The Sixth Amendment gives defendants the right to counsel in federal prosecutions.
Whether dealing with criminal or civil cases, a Defense Attorney is an advocate for the accused, responsible for protecting their client's interests. When individuals or corporations are brought before a court as the defendant, they are at risk of having a judgment made against them.
Wainright, the Supreme Court explained the importance of this right, stating, “[I]n our adversary system of criminal justice, any person haled into court, who is too poor to hire a lawyer, cannot be assured a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him.” The right to counsel protects all of us from being subjected to ...Sep 17, 2008
The court reporterThe court reporter sits near the witness stand in the courtroom and records everything that is said during the trial (or introduced into evidence) by typing it on a stenographic machine or by making an electronic sound recording. This becomes the official record of the trial.
plaintiff, the party who brings a legal action or in whose name it is brought—as opposed to the defendant, the party who is being sued.
the JudgeA judgment is the statement given by the Judge, on the grounds of a decree or order. It is the end product of the proceedings in the Court. The writing of a judgment is one of the most important and time consuming task performed by a Judge.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the legal burden of proof required to affirm a conviction in a criminal case. In a criminal case, the prosecution bears the burden of proving that the defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.
In the last year for which the Bureau of Justice Statistics published detailed figures, more than 80 percent of felony defendants charged with violent crimes in the largest U.S. counties could not afford to hire attorneys; the same was true for 66 percent of such defendants in U.S. district courts.Dec 8, 2016
the Fifth Amendment to the US ConstitutionThe Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for substantially the same crime. The relevant part of the Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . "
The Fifth Amendment creates a number of rights relevant to both criminal and civil legal proceedings. In criminal cases, the Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to a grand jury, forbids “double jeopardy,” and protects against self-incrimination.
The Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination protects witnesses from forced self-incrimination, and the Sixth Amendment provides criminal defendants with the right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses and to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses.
Advantages of Hiring a Public Defender. A public defender is appointed to defendants who cannot afford to hire a private lawyer and who requests one to be appointed. Therefore, the defendant does not have to pay for his or her lawyer, which can otherwise be very expensive. Public defenders are familiar with a variety of criminal cases ...
Private lawyers usually do not have nearly as many cases as public defenders. This allows them to have more one on one time with clients. This time can be used to get better acquainted with the defendant and to discover information that can aid the defense.
For many people, the only disadvantage of hiring a private lawyer is having to pay for his or her services. This can sometimes be a substantial amount especially if the case is serious. However, the advantages of hiring a private lawyer often far outweigh the disadvantage of having to pay for the services he or she provides.
These dynamics can make it so that they may make mistakes with cases or not have as much time to prepare. Due to possibly juggling hundreds of cases at a time, a public defender may have limited amounts of time to actually meet with clients.
Expert witnesses may be hired to explain a key aspect of the case. Private laboratories may be used to test evidence that will be used against the defendant. Private investigators may help unearth important evidence that will aid the defense.
Public defenders are governmental employees. As such, they usually make much less than private lawyers. Since so many people are unable to afford to hire a lawyer for their criminal defense, they often have large caseloads. It is common for public defenders to be overworked and underpaid.
Defense counsel also provide more personal services by giving the defendant a reality check as to the possible outcomes and by helping the defendant to deal with the frustrations and fears resulting from being thrown into the criminal justice system. And of course, if no plea deal can be made, the defense lawyer represents the defendant at trial.
Within the complex criminal justice system, a defense attorney serves as the defendant's guide, protector, and confidant. (At least that's how it's supposed to be.) Defense attorneys are usually grouped in two camps: court-appointed attorneys paid by the government and private attorneys paid by the defendant. ...
Because of a number of factors—political and public pressure, overcrowded jails, overloaded court calendars—deal-making has grown in importance and has become an essential element in unclogging the criminal justice system.
These court-appointed attorneys are either public defenders who are on government salary, or they are so-called "panel attorneys," local attorneys chosen from a panel. A small fraction of criminal defendants (approximately two percent) represent themselves and are referred to as "pro se" or "pro per" defendants.
What is clear is that being represented by a lawyer is almost always the best option. Nevertheless, some criminal defendants represent themselves. The decision of whether a defendant can self-represent is ultimately made by the judge, not the defendant. The judge is required to determine the defendant's competency.
Each attorney has an unlimited number of "for cause" challenges which are, as the term suggests, based on a specified reason or "cause" to challenge the prospective juror. A prospective juror may be challenged for cause because of: 1 exposure to pretrial publicity about the case, 2 a connection with a party, an attorney, the judge, or a witness in the case 3 experience as a victim of a crime that is similar to that being tried 4 a religious prohibition on imposing a sentence or otherwise fulfilling his or her role, or 5 gender, race, or other bias.
During voir dire, the attorneys scrutinize each prospective juror to try to determine if she or he would be sympathetic to one side or the other. The attorneys are also trying to determine if a prospective juror harbors any biases that would prevent them from being impartial.
Voir Dire. Before even going to the courthouse, the court or jury management office usually sends prospective jurors a written questionnaire. The answers help weed out people who truly cannot serve as jurors due to physical, language, or irresolvable family or other conflicts.
In federal criminal trials, the number of peremptory challenges allowed is ten for the defendant and six for the prosecution in a felony case, 20 for each side in a death penalty case, and three for each side in a misdemeanor case (Fed. R. Crim. P. 24.) (In a civil case, federal rules allow each side three peremptory challenges. (28 U.S.C. § 1870.))
When an attorney wants to challenge a juror for cause, they must state to the court the reason for that challenge. Even though the number of such challenges is unlimited, attorneys do not generally exercise very many because of the difficulty of accusing a prospective juror of bias or other incompetency to serve.
Although no reason must be given for exercising a peremptory challenge, an attorney's use of the challenge cannot be motivated by bi as. If, for example, a defense attorney believes the prosecution is using peremptory challenges to exclude black jurors or women jurors, the prosecutor will need to show a race- or gender-neutral reason for the challenge.
exposure to pretrial publicity about the case, a connection with a party, an attorney, the judge, or a witness in the case. experience as a victim of a crime that is similar to that being tried. a religious prohibition on imposing a sentence or otherwise fulfilling his or her role, or. gender, race, or other bias.
If two people were fighting with each other than one attorney cannot represent both. It would be considered a conflict . The attorney could not effectively represent one individual without jeopardizing the interest of the other individual. If the two individuals were fighting others, an attorney may be able to represent both (although not recommended); however, the two clients would have to be on equal footing in all respects. For example, they could not be able to claim that the other was more culpable or that the other stated the fight. Basically they must be able to raise defenses that apply equally to both.
Yes, an attorney can represent both if there is no conflict. In certain cases, conflict can be waived. However, if the case goes to trial, it may be required to have 2 attorneys.
If the lawyer can represent to the court that the duel representation will not limit either client or create a conflict and both defendant's agree. This is rarely done however. Usually there is a material conflict.
Technically, maybe, practically, probably not. An attorney has a duty of loyalty to his client. An attorney cannot represent two co-defendants if there is an actual conflict. If "A" says "B" did it and "B" says "A" did it, there would be an obvious conflict. An attorney could not here represent "A" and "B". If there is a potential conflict, an attorney may get "A" and "B" to agree to allow their information to be shared with the same attorney. However, this is very risky for the attorney. Should the potential conflict bloom into an actual conflict the attorney would likely be forced to withdraw from both. You should seek the advice of the state bar as well addressing the specific ethics rules for the region where the case occurs.
If the two people have the same interest and there is no issue as to one blaming the other, it could be possible. Most attorneys would decline to enter into such a dual representation.
Representing co-defendants is generally a conflict of interest. However, if both people agree to waive the conflict, there are some circumstances where the same attorney can represent both. It is advisable to get independent legal advice on whether you should even waive the conflict.
When there is a conflict between the two interests then one attorney could not best represent one client without harming the interest of the other. It is never a good idea to have one attorney for more than one defendant in a case. However, it is possible if both defendants sign a statement outlining the possible conflicts and agreeing to one attorney representing both. Most competent attorneys will not represent two defendants in the same case.
Over one million individuals possess Professional licenses issued by California licensing Boards. Most California Professional providers have minimal or no contact with the disciplinary systems of the numerous California Professional Licensing Boards.
Many California Professional License disciplinary investigations occur in San Jose. The investigations often begin with the filing of a consumer Complaint. However, disciplinary Investigations also occur through sting operations, criminal conviction referrals and criminal investigations.
A formal Accusation served on a California Professional Licensee serves as notice to a Professional licensee that the Board intends to revoke the individual’s Professional License. The licensee, now called the Respondent, has only 15 days from the date that the Accusation was served (not received, but served) to file a Notice of Defense.
The California Office of Administrative Hearings, also known as OAH, maintains several Court Hearing locations. All San Jose Administrative law matters are heard at the OAH Oakland office. The Administrative Law Hearing is a formal Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
California Professional Licensing Boards can discipline licensees for criminal convictions. Administrative Law discipline occurs for criminal convictions that are substantially related to the duties, functions and qualifications of the respective Professional licensee.