Sunday's Northwest Herald brought announcement of a new special court in McHenry County. This one is to handle domestic violence cases.
What will be different? Cases aren't going to drag for 12-24 months. Offenders aren't going to slack off as much in meeting the terms of their sentences.
I can't tell you how many times I have visited courtrooms and watched hundreds of cases catch routine continuances. A judge calls a case; the attorneys and the defendant step up, and the defense attorney requests a continuance. The judge doesn't ask for a reason; the prosecution doesn't object. The defendant scribbles down his next court date, usually 30 days later, and away everyone goes.
Shortly after a person is charged, he "lawyers-up" and the game begins. The lawyer demands a jury trial; they must have a rubber stamp in the office for that. Then continuance after continuance. Finally a jury trial date is set. Then it gets postponed. Then it gets set again. On the morning of the trial, the judge asks if both sides are ready and calls them back at 1:30PM for jury selection. Then they have a 402 Conference and a deal is struck, avoiding a jury trial. Another jury wasted.
"'For four months, nothing is done on the file until the Monday night before a Tuesday trial,' (Judge) Weech said."
Judge Weech will be more involved in the plea deals, too. It sounds like he isn't going to let the attorneys just pitch a deal at him.
Do convicted persons always meet the terms of their sentences? Perform the required number of hours of community service? Complete alcohol or drug treatment and/or counseling? Pay their fines? Make restitution?
Among many of my courtroom visits, I have seen judges wade into convicted persons who have not completed even simple conditions that include 10-20 hours of community service in six months. It takes cooperation between court services and staff and convicted persons, and that staff, it seems, doesn't understand that the person's lack of self-management skills and personal motivation prevents them from knocking out those hours in the first week or two.
Apparently, the plan is to have a convicted person return to court in 60 days, so that the judge can learn whether his orders are being complied with. Even 60 days is too long to wait. The first follow-up, which could be by court services, ought to occur in 7-14 days.
Frivolous use of the jury trial demand should stop. If a jury trial is demanded, then the trial date should be set, and the judge should tell the defense attorney that the trial will begin on that date. And then don't back down. At the same time, there needs to be a burden on the prosecution to charge a person properly and not over-charge him, either in degree or number of charges.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Sigh, once more you miss the point. The point isn't that the defense delays the case, the point is that the State does not make reasonable deals, nor do the willingly comply with discovery orders.
Because most, if not all, defense attorneys charge a flat fee, it is of NO ADVANTAGE to needlessly continue the case.
When the case gets settled on the date of trial, it is not because the defense attorney caved in (many times there is no place to cave in to, if the State is offering 6 months jail on a case that the max is 6 months in jail... I HAVE TO GO TO TRIAL because I can't lose), it is because the State made some offer that is finally reasonable.
You (and the court) have missed the boat on this again and again. To me you are both just funny. If there is one thing that will shorten the wait, it will be the judge looking at the State and saying ... "you better be reasonable or I will try the case right now (not at 1:30), and I predict you will lose." Or if the judge just flat out dismisses the case if the State doesn't provide test results or witnesses on time.
Our judges do not hold the State to delivering evidence on time. Further, a judge that just retired gave the State's attorney the questions to establish a foundation after it took her two days (and she still couldn't establish that the evidence was reliable).
I know you get all of your information from tv and what you can hear in court. But you just don't get it. Defense Attorneys have never been the problem.
Further, domestic violence cases are ruled by the victims. If they don't show then the case gets dismissed. No defense attorney is going to answer anything but ready for trial until the State proves they can provide a witness.
All of the "we are going to improve this system" talk has been going on for as long as I have been an attorney (20 years).
Question: Are felony Domestic Violence already continued in front of Judge Prather going to be transferred to this new court?
No disrespect to Ray, but the system is being abused mostly by defendants, though sometimes by prosecutors.
The victims, mostly women, deserve justice. Justice is served by speedy trials, especially when the evidence against the perpetrator is clear.
One reader provided this comment by email:
"Ray ... is the kind of defense attorney that the State hates. He is all about himself. He always says 'I' instead of the client. Most lawyers charge a flat fee for DUIs, but when you get in to criminal trials, you bet the bottom dollar they
charge by the hour. They charge from when they leave their office. Do you get paid to drive to work? I don't.
"He neglected to say that when the state offers 6 months and that is the most his client could get if he was found guilty is 6, the defense usually wants probation for his client and won't budge until the Monday before the Tuesday at which time he settles for 3 months, which is what the norm would be any way. That way he can squeeze his client for each and every continuance and look like a last minute hero so they keep coming back to him. There is usual and customary outcomes for most crimes with similar criminal histories or lack thereof.
"Ray grew up in the system 20 years ago when Gary Pack was the SA. Pack would over charge and make plea deals. He was all about a conviction rate no matter what felony he dropped to get a conviction for Disorderly Conduct. He just wanted convictions for his reelection campaign.
"Then came Lou. Lou was all about trying cases to get convictions, no more business as usual. Lawyers like Ray weren't used to trials and really didn't know what to do because they had no trial experience. They were used to always having negotiated pleas. To Lou's detriment, he tries cases and is not afraid of losing a few, even though he probably shouldn't have gone to trial with some, but at least he tries.
"Ray was wrong about domestic violence cases. They don't need the victim any more to testify. They can use the victims words to 911 or to law enforcement during the case and the police can testify about that. It is called victimless prosecution. It is used and has been very successful in the past. Granted, it always looks better when you have a cooperating witness, but in DV cases, it is not necessary."
Dear Anonymous Poster: Ummm, no.
First I only know of a handful of attorneys that have more DUI/Domestic Battery trial experience than I do, and I didn't get that experience because of Lou Bianchi. Second, Lou Bianchi is a great friend, and I like the job he is doing.
Back when Pack was State's Attorney I tried three jury trials to verdict in one month. Last year under Lou, I won 6 of 7 trials.
I charge a flat fee, always have ... I don't know why everyone thinks that I showboat, I guess winning=showboating?
Lastly, if you would like to try a case based on a statement, I welcome it. The case wasn't important enough for the victim to show up, but the State wants you to find the defendant guilty ... I am sure the jury will think long and hard what the "victim" or the State is trying to hide.
P.S. The reason I say "I" is that "I" try the case, not the defendant. And I am pretty sure the State doesn't hate me. And some of our assistant State's attorneys are the best attorneys anywhere, (although I am sure that some of the assistants do hate me, which is fine).
Oh and another thing: There is a lot of crap spewed during a political campaign, for example, Obama wants more transparency in government. He didn't.
The line that goes: "Lou was all about trying cases to get convictions, no more business as usual." Was a political slogan. Really nothing more.
Gary Pack was a bad State's Attorney for other reasons. Really he was sort of an absentee father, and the place sort of ran itself. But Lou pounced on this "no more business as usual" meme, during the election and people ran with it. To Lou's credit, he did save a lot of taxpayer money by cutting out payments made to Harrison's Office for "outside" legal work, and he did clean house which I think is a healthy thing to do from time to time in a powerful office like the State's Attorney.
But as an outside observer, who is friends with Lou, to be honest I don't see much change in the prosecution of the types of cases that I handle DUI and Domestic Battery.
The attorneys assigned to these court rooms are not senior attorneys and most all of them move on to other court rooms in a few years. I get the feeling that they think that the DUI and Domestic Battery courtrooms are a stop on the way to more important courtrooms.
Post a Comment