A criminal defense investigator plays an important role on your criminal defense team. He or she will assist your criminal defense attorney in preparation for trial, including gathering records and interviewing witnesses. Having a diligent, experienced criminal defense investigator is crucial!
1) Hit the Ground Running
When an "incident" happens and police are called, they immediately start investigating. Law enforcement will interview witnesses with fresh memories, collect evidence, take photographs at the scene, and gather information. By immediately retaining a private criminal defense attorney with a good investigator, you can ensure that YOUR team will also hit the ground running. This means taking defense-friendly photographs at the scene, interviewing those same witnesses to get statements that may be more defense friendly, interviewing other witnesses unknown to law enforcement (or intentionally avoided because they do not help the State's case), or other investigation such as requesting copies of video surveillance, audio recordings, or other electronic evidence. Hiring a private attorney who has a smaller caseload will ensure that your advocate and investigator will hit the ground running.
2) Another Perspective on the Case
An experienced criminal defense attorney will already know what to be looking for as she reviews your case. She will be searching for potential search issues, violations of your constitutional rights, problems with the police investigation, or other evidentiary issues. Another set of eyes and another perspective is another reason why having a defense investigator is crucial. A great investigator can assist with case theories, possible defenses, or offer different ideas for moving forward with the investigation.
3) Digging up Dirt
Criminal defense investigators are often tasked with digging up dirt on the State's witnesses. This can be by filing Public Disclosure Requests with police agencies, issuing a Subpoena Duces Tecum on people or businesses who may have relevant information, or conducting witness interviews to discover impeachment evidence, biases, or prior acts of State witnesses that may be admissible at trial to help with your defense. This is especially true for self-defense cases where any prior violent act by the "alleged victim" would be admissible at trial. It is important to diligently search for any information that could be helpful in your defense.
4) Running the Witness Interview
Criminal defense investigators typically prepare for and conduct all witness interviews. Sometimes criminal defense attorneys attend those (I always do!). Interviewing state witnesses before trial allows defense investigators and attorneys the opportunity to ask hard questions and elicit important details that may have been ignored by the prosecutor or police. It allows us to gather more information about what the witness will be testifying to, and also push into the weak areas of the prosecutor's case. Witness interviews are an important part of any criminal defense.
5) A Defense Witness at Trial
At trial, it can be intimidating to see the State line up its 15-20 witnesses, including several law enforcement officers. If any police officer had any role in your case, however limited, the prosecutor will put that person up on the stand to testify about what he or she did. It can be extremely daunting to see uniformed officer and uniformed officer coming in the courtroom to testify against you. And most times, there are NO defense witnesses or VERY FEW. That's just how the system works. However, a great criminal defense investigator can be a wonderful defense witness at trial. We can put that investigator on the stand just like the State puts the lead detective on the stand. Just like the lead detective will explain everything he or she did to investigate why you are GUILTY of a crime, our defense investigator can discuss his investigation and why you are clearly NOT GUILTY of the crime. It can be a powerful way to rebut the State's long stream of officer witnesses.
Reprinted from Avvo Legal Guide.
Work/Life Balance: How to stay committed to the “life” part
How many years, days, and hours will we “work” in our lifetime?
According to Distractify, the average American works for 40 hours per week from ages 20-65. That adds up to a whopping 10.3 total years of your life.
Work is an essential part of a person’s lifetime. It is a piece of who you are, and makes up and key component of your personality. One of the first questions a stranger asks another when first meeting is “what do you do” or some other way of inquiring about what the person does for his profession, career or job.
However, if we are not careful, we can end up putting more energy and time into our work life that we become “work-a-holics” and sacrifice our home life. This can jeopardize our relationship or marriage, our bond with our children, and our own mental health.
Lawyering is one of the highest professions for “burn out” and depression. According to an often cited Johns Hopkins University study of more than 100 occupations, researchers found that lawyers lead the nation with the highest incidence of depression. Eaton, W.W. (1990). Occupations and the prevalence of major depressive disorder.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 32 (11), 1079-1087.
An American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division survey indicated that 41 percent of female attorneys were unhappy with their jobs. That number is shocking. I am happy to say that I am one of the 59% of female lawyers that loves my job and is happy to wake up and serve my clients every day. But I also started my own practice so that I could have the freedom to set my own schedule. I am able to leave early on days that I want to catch a 4:30 pm Bikram yoga class, and work later on days that I need to make sure my clients are well taken care of. Having my own practice allows me to achieve the work/life balance I have always dreamed of having.
Here are my tips for achieving a good work/life balance:
1. Set a specific time that you will leave your desk every day. Do not allow yourself to say “I will stay here until it is finished.” That way of thinking allows you to waste time and get distracted, instead of forcing yourself to work with the time allotted for completing the task. This can be hard to sell to hard workers, but trust that you will get all of the tasks completed and you can always return to the task in the morning.
2. Learn to prioritize your life - focus and put your efforts into action items that are truly important. Let go of those items that are either insignificant or not time-sensitive. Know that work will ALWAYS be there. Your son’s third birthday only comes once in a lifetime.
3. Don’t waste time on obligations that are not serving you. Ask yourself “do I need to do this?” and cut out plans or obligations that are not serving you. Sure, we could fill our schedules with endless networking events. But, every so often we should ask whether we are getting the referrals or connection we want at these events and whether we should spend more time on other efforts that achieve better results.
4. Recognize that "mistakes" are a part of life, essential, and often present the opportunity for important learning opportunities. One of my favorite phrases is: “sometimes you win, and sometimes you learn.”
5. Get active at least three times a week. This could be yoga, or the gym, or a fitness class, or even a walk with your dog at night. Getting your heart rate up and releasing some endorphins has a positive effect on your mood, stress level, and overall happiness.
6. Try meditation. There are some amazing apps out there now, such as Headspace, that only ask 10 minutes of your time a day to check out and connect with the quiet space in your mind. Not only does this help clear my head, but it also leaves me refreshed and full of ideas and energy when I’m finished. I find that spending 10-30 minutes meditating per day actually gives me more motivation and efficiency throughout my day.
7. Seek balance in your life. Make sure you are taking time to care for yourself so that you can care for your clients. As with other high-pressure and demanding professions, attorneys who neglect their physical, psychological, spiritual, and interpersonal lives run the risk of making mistakes on the job. If you are sleep-deprived, you will be doing your clients a disservice. You may react with less patience toward a client that harms your relationship, or you may be less sharp and miss an important detail in their case. Sleep and self-care will make you a better lawyer.
8. Accept that the practice of law is inherently stressful. While it is important to accept this reality, it is not okay to succumb to it. Know that your job is to advise your clients, not save them from every possibly bad scenario. Sometimes you cannot be superwoman. You can only do your best and say “I fought my hardest for you.” One phrase I often tell myself is: “You can’t change the facts.” We are given a set of facts and must do our best with those facts to advocate for our clients. We can only do our best. We cannot save the world.
To close, I ask: what do you want your loved ones to say at your eulogy? “He was a really hard worker?” Or would you like to know at the end of your life that you did not spend 90% of your time at your desk? Hopefully these tools will help you to create a good work/life balance, ensuring that you spend the most time possible with your loved ones, restore your mental health and balance to ensure you are the best attorney you can be, and recharge your cup daily so that you can give your best 100% effort during your work day.
A Life for a Life: a Hard Look at Washington State's Death Penalty
By Emily M. Gause
(As published in Washington Criminal Defense Magazine, November 2015)
““An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.”
”
In the span of two months, two King County juries returned two verdicts refusing to impose the death penalty. Those two cases, State v. Christopher Monfort and State v. Joseph McEnroe, cost King County over $12.2 million dollars. And, in the end, neither one received the death penalty as punishment for his crime.
Christopher Monfort was convicted of murdering a police officer.[i] On Halloween night 2009, Monfort opened fire on a police car, killing Officer Timothy Brenton and wounding his partner, Brit Sweeney.
Joseph McEnroe was convicted for his role in a brutal family massacre, killing his girlfriend Michele Anderson’s family on Christmas Eve 2007 in Carnation. Known as the “Carnation Killer,” Joseph McEnroe shot his girlfriend’s parents, their son and his wife, and their young two children.[ii]
In the short period of just two months, King County prosecutors tried, but failed to convince a jury to kill these two murderers. It is clear that Seattle jurors are unwilling to impose the outdated “eye for an eye” mentality by executing a human being as punishment for murder. Because of these two verdicts, King County Prosecutors declined to seek the death penalty against Michele Anderson , the alleged co-defendant and co-conspirator of Joseph McEnroe.
Such sentiment disfavoring imposition of the death penalty extends to other states as well. On August 7, 2015 a Colorado jury returned a life verdict in the death penalty trial for James Holmes, the man convicted of the Aurora movie theater massacre that killed 12 and wounded 70 more.[iii] In May 2015, Nebraska Senators voted to repeal the death penalty. In August 2015, the Connecticut Supreme Court (4-3) held that the state's death penalty was in violation of the state's constitution and converted all pending death sentences to life sentences, reasoning:
"[T]his state’s death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose."[iv]
In Washington, there have been 339 aggravated murder cases filed since 1981 when the death penalty was reinstated. Out of that number, the state prosecutors sought death in 83 cases. Out of those 83, juries only returned a verdict for death in 33 cases in the last 34 years. And in those 34 years, Washington State has executed five people.
So, is the death penalty in Washington officially “dead”?
This article explores:
· The current state of death penalty policy in Washington State;
· The problems with the death penalty: the exorbitant costs, high number of reversals, and role of race in capital cases;
· The Christopher Monfort case in more detail, including insight from the courageous public defenders that spent years fighting to have their client’s life spared;
· What we can expect in 2016 – is the death penalty on its way out?
The current state of death penalty policy in Washington State
Washington State’s death penalty law is codified in RCW 10.95. It allows prosecutors authority to present the death penalty as one sentencing option to the jury in a first degree murder case. A jury must find “there are not sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency” in order to impose death. RCW 10.95.030(2).
In early 2014, Washington State’s governor, Jay Inslee, issued a moratorium on death sentences citing “problems that exist in our capital punishment system.”[v] Data shows that out of 33 death sentences imposed since the punishment laws were enacted in 1981, over half were overturned (18 reversals out of 24 death sentences that have completed the appeal process).[vi]
The move makes Washington the latest in a series of states to step away from capital punishment and makes Mr. Inslee the third Democratic governor in recent years to say something similar. Gov. John Kitzhaber of Oregon announced in 2011 that he would not permit any executions on his watch, and last year Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado issued an indefinite reprieve in the only death penalty case during his tenure.[vii]
Despite the progress forward toward abolishing death penalty, a 2014 Gallup poll showed that 6 in 10 Americans favor the death penalty for convicted murderers.[viii] That poll showed that 49% of democrats are in favor of death penalty, whereas 76% of republicans are in favor.[ix] Many Americans, however, are not fully informed on the many problems with capital punishment: the exorbitant costs, arbitrary application, number of exonerations or reversals, and racially-biased imposition of this practice.
The Problems with Capital Punishment
Death is Expensive
In 2006, the Washington State Bar Association explored the costs of death penalty in Washington and found that these cases each cost an average of $517,000 more than cases where the penalty sought is life without the possibility of parole.[x]
Most recently, Seattle University published a report in January 2015 that the average cost of a death penalty case in Washington is $3.07 million, compared to $2.01 million for cases in which the prosecutor does not seek the death penalty.[xi]
That study broke down the phases of a death penalty case and the costs associated with each phase.
Defense and prosecution costs skyrocket when litigating a death penalty case. It costs Washington State an average of $600,000 more to defend a death penalty case than it would to defend a murder case seeking a punishment of life without the possibility of parole.[xii] Prosecuting an average death penalty case in Washington increases costs by over $221,000.[xiii]
SU Law’s study examined 147 aggravated murder cases since 1997 and limited its analysis to economic cost estimation alone.
In King County, defending Christopher Monfort has cost $5.8 million dollars so far.[xiv] Prosecuting him cost approximately $1 million as of April 30, 2015.[xv] Enforcing the death penalty isn’t cheap. Joseph McEnroe cost the county $4.4 million, and while the death penalty was still an option for Michele Anderson, defense costs skyrocketed to over $4 million in her case alone.[xvi] The combined cost of prosecuting both McEnroe and Anderson was roughly $1.06 million through November 2014, according to the prosecutor’s office.[xvii]
Why the high costs? What is it about a death penalty case that requires so much more preparation, diligence, and time? Our Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for defense counsel to be death penalty qualified, and provided a spectrum of guidance about what is necessary to be “effective” in a death penalty case. Two defense attorneys must be appointed for the trial and also for the direct appeal.[xviii] Mitigation packages must be prepared, often in conjunction with an extensive psychological or neuropsychological evaluation. Investigators or mitigation specialists must dive deeper into an accused’s background, interviewing high school classmates, extended family members, and turning over every stone in search of any mitigating circumstances that could provide a basis for leniency.
Not only is the investigation more lengthy and thorough, taking years to complete, a death penalty trial also takes much longer. Death penalty cases require a death qualified jury, that is a jury who is fair and impartial when it comes to one of the most hotly debated policies in our nation. So, jury selection takes weeks or even months to complete. Trials take longer – there is both a guilt phase and a separate penalty phase.
An average of over $1 million dollars per case could be saved if prosecutors chose not to seek the death penalty. Couldn’t the time and resources that public defense agencies and prosecutor offices put into a death penalty case be spent in so many more meaningful ways? Aren’t government office resources already strung so thin? As policy makers get together next legislative session for yet another conversation about death penalty, Seattle University’s 2015 study about costs will surely be put to good use.
Our Criminal Justice System Isn’t Always Right – Reversals and Exonerations
There have been 339 aggravated murder cases filed since 1981 when the death penalty was reinstated in Washington. Out of that number, the King County Prosecutor sought death in 83 cases. Out of those 83, juries only returned a verdict for death in 33 cases in the last 34 years. And in those 34 years, Washington State has only executed five people.
Mark Larranaga, one of our state’s lead death penalty defense lawyers, has said “It’s a complete waste of time and resources. We’ve had five executions in forty years. That means 75-80 percent of death penalty cases have been reversed.”[xix]
The Innocence Project has done incredible work at educating people nationwide about the number of innocent people that are convicted, based on junk science or flawed eyewitness identifications, and working to reverse those convictions. As of June 2015, there were a reported 155 exonerations in 26 different states for people awaiting a death sentence.[xx]
Last year, two men were released from prison in Ohio after their exonerations from death row.[xxi] The men were convicted of a 1975 murder based on the testimony of a 12-year-old boy. Prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss charges against the men after the witness recently recanted, admitting he had not seen the murder at all. Both men spent 39 years in prison – the longest time between conviction and exoneration of anyone released from death row nationwide.
Mistakes happen. Witnesses lie. People make mistakes. What would have happened if the witness recanted after these two men were executed? Can we allow innocent people to be killed when we are aware of such inconsistencies and flaws within our criminal justice system?
Our Death Penalty Policy is Imposed in a Racially Biased Manner
One of the nine men currently on death row in Walla Walla is Allen Gregory. His appeal is currently before our state Supreme Court, written by defense champions Neil Fox and Lila Silverstein. They commissioned a UW sociology professor to examine “The Role of Race in Washington State Capital Sentencing” between 1981 and 2014 to assist in their advocacy for Mr. Gregory.[xxii] This is the first statistical study to examine race in capital sentences in Washington. Using regression analysis, the study found that African American defendants in Washington are 4.5 times more likely than white defendants to be sentenced to death, after controlling for relevant case characteristics.[xxiii] The statistical analysis also found that most of the variation in sentences cannot be explained – further proving that our death penalty truly is just as random and arbitrary as when it was abolished by Furman v. Georgia in 1972. As articulated in briefing for Mr. Gregory, “social factors like race are not supposed to matter in the determination of who is sentenced to death.”[xxiv] Using the study, Fox and Silverstein argue that the Washington Supreme Court should hold Washington State’s death penalty is unconstitutional in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and Article I, section 14 of the Washington Constitution.
Gregory will be scheduled for argument sometime in winter 2016.
Down with Death – A closer look at Christopher Monfort’s case
Mr. Monfort had never been in prison before the day he shot and killed Seattle Police Officer Timothy Brenton. He never denied committing the charged act. Instead, his defense attorneys presented voluminous evidence that Mr. Monfort was legally insane at the time he shot the officer. And despite the clear evidence that Mr. Monfort was not quite right in the head, Dan Satterberg still marched forward seeking justice through the death penalty.
I sat down with Carl Luer, one of the defense attorneys who spent five years defending Christopher Monfort, and asked him about what he thinks Mr. Monfort’s life verdict means for the future of Washington’s death penalty laws. This is what he had to say:
“Time for death penalty in the United States has long since passed; we should join the other industrialized democracies in the world and abolish this practice.
It’s a little bewildering to me that we continue to cling to it. In Washington State we have a somewhat Schizophrenic relationship with the death penalty. A significant number of people want to keep it, but we also want to make sure defendants get full process and protections under the law at all costs.
The death penalty is a tremendous waste of resources.”
Monfort’s case could have been resolved with a plea of guilty as charged with a sentence of life without the possibility of parole as early as July of 2010. Instead, the King County Prosecutor spent over $6.8 million dollars and five additional years to pursue the death penalty, only to have a jury return a unanimous verdict for life in prison. What a waste.
What’s Next?
The last Washington State jury to sentence a person to death occurred in 2013 in Snohomish County.[xxv] Two years later, two King County juries could not impose death. Has enough changed in two years to shift public opinion about this outdated punishment policy?
Clarence Moriwaki, ACLU Washington’s Alternatives to the Death Penalty campaign manager shared the following insight about what we might see in 2016:
The growing state-wide trend for alternatives to the death penalty shows encouraging signs that are also being felt in Olympia. Bipartisan support for abolishing the death penalty has been increasing with each passing session, with successful hearings in the Washington State House of Representatives and Senate on bipartisan-sponsored bills which have earned positive media attention and editorial support.
The recent failure of juries in King County to impose the death penalty on two highly publicized, emotionally charged murder cases (one jury spent less than an hour to return a sentence of life without the possibility of release) –as well as the more than $12 million spent on these cases – is adding an exclamation point. When given the choice, the public is turning away from the wasteful use of tax dollars to pursue a broken government program – one that does not deter murders, does not make us any safer, is neither swift nor just, holds a real risk of executing the innocent, makes celebrities out of murderers, and adds excruciating pain to victims’ families with every courtroom deliberation.
Will Washington following in Nebraska’s footsteps by repealing the death penalty in the 2016 Legislative Session? As criminal defense attorneys, we can only hope.
Given what we know about the enormous cost to taxpayers, the number of death sentences that are eventually overturned, and the arbitrary and racially-biased imposition of capital punishment, is our death penalty statute still constitutional? We will find out in 2016.
[i] Sara Jean Green, “Monfort Sentenced to Life in Prison for Killing Seattle Police Officer,” Seattle Times, July 23, 2015
[ii] Jennifer Sullivan and Steve Miletich, “Split Jury Spares Carnation Killer McEnroe from Death,” Seattle Times, May 13, 2015
[iii] Stave Almasy, Ann O’Neill, Sara Weisfeldt, and Ana Cabrera, “James Holmes Sentenced to Life in Prison for Colorado movie theater murders,” CNN, August 8, 2015
[iv] State v. Santiago, 2015 BL 260876, Conn, SC 17413, published August 25, 2015
[v] Ian Lovett, “Executions are Suspended by Governor in Washington,” The New York Times, February 11, 2014
[vi] Peter A. Collins, Robert C. Boruchowitz, Matthew J. Hickman & Mark Larranaga, “An Analysis of the Economic Costs of Seeking the Death Penalty in Washington State,” Seattle University, January 1, 2015, at page 69.
[vii] Ian Lovett, “Executions are Suspended by Governor in Washington,” The New York Times, February 11, 2014; Death Penalty Information Center, “Gov. John Kitzhaber of Oregon Declares a Moratoium on All Executions, November 12, 2011
[viii] Jeffrey M. Jones, “Americans’ Support for Death Penalty Stable, Gallup, October 23, 2014
[ix] Id.
[x] Washington State Bar Association, Final Report of the Death Penalty Subcommittee of the Committee on Public Defense, December 2006
[xi] Peter A. Collins, Robert C. Boruchowitz, Matthew J. Hickman & Mark Larranaga, “An Analysis of the Economic Costs of Seeking the Death Penalty in Washington State,” Seattle University, January 1, 2015, at page 4.
[xii] Id. at Figure 1
[xiii] Id.
[xiv] Sara Jean Green, “Monfort Sentenced to Life in Prison for Killing Seattle Police Officer,” Seattle Times, July 23, 2015
[xv] Id.
[xvi] Jennifer Sullivan, “Prosecutors Won’t seek Death Penalty for Michele Anderson,” Seattle Times, July 29, 2015
[xvii] Jennifer Sullivan and Steve Miletich, “Split Jury Spares Carnation Killer McEnroe from Death,” Seattle Times, May 13, 2015
[xviii] Superior Court Special Proceeding Rule 2 – Appointment Of Counsel
[xix] Lael Henterly, “Holding Three Simultaneous Death Penalty Trials in King County is Unprecedented and Hugely Expensive,” The Stranger, November 12, 2014
[xx] Death Penalty Information Center, Innocence Database, last updated July 22, 2015
[xxi] M. Gillispie, "Judge dismisses two men charged in 1975 slaying," Associated Press, November 21, 2014.
[xxii] Katherine Beckett & Heather Evans, The Role of Race in Washington State Capital Sentencing 1981-2014, Department of Sociology, University of Washington, filed October 13, 2014 in State v. Gregory, # 88086-7
[xxiii] Id. at 30, 33.
[xxiv] State v. Gregory, # 88086-7, Appellant’s Reply Brief at 51.
[xxv] Peter A. Collins, Robert C. Boruchowitz, Matthew J. Hickman & Mark Larranaga, “An Analysis of the Economic Costs of Seeking the Death Penalty in Washington State,” Seattle University, January 1, 2015, at page 71 (State v. Bryon Scherf, sentenced on May 9, 2013)
Emily M. Gause has been practicing in criminal defense since 2011 and recently opened her own practice (Gause Law Offices). She focuses on felonies in state and federal courts throughout Washington. She can be reached at emily@emilygauselaw.com. Special thanks to Timera Charlene Drake for her assistance with research and editing. Appreciation to Carl Luer, Lila Silverstein, Neil Fox, and Clarence Moriwaki for their contributions to this piece.
Our BULGING prison population
25% of our global population is locked up in cages in the United States. Imprisoned. The United States is the world’s leader, locking up 2.2 million people currently. One in every thirty-five adults are under some form of correctional control (prison, jail, parole, or probation).
Dan Satterberg, King County’s Elected Prosecutor, recently gave a TED talk about criminal justice reform. He touched on issues that intersect with our criminal justice system: addiction, mental health issues, domestic violence, and issues compounded by poverty and lack of opportunities. He focused on the person behind the crime and the issues that can cause people to seek criminal activity.
Satterberg also touched on the fiscal issue that over-incarcerating people creates on our already strapped government budgets. We have never been safer, according to crime statistics, and yet we are locking up more and more people. 18,000 people are in prison in Washington state. And we are at 100% capacity currently. The legislature has denied pitches to build more prisons.
In fact, as recently reported in the Seattle Times, Washington State is now paying private prisons in other states to house our prisoners at the price of $60 per day per inmate. That is a LOT of money that could go to education, our homeless population, mental health facilities, resources for people who are coming out of our prisons, or other social justice projects.
So what do we do? What is the solution?
I firmly believe that we send people away for longer than necessary. Even the “violent offenders” (who often consist of a first time offender that did one violent act in his life and is now spending decades in prison). We should be diverting first time offenders away from the system rather than pushing them inside concrete walls with other prisoners thereby often creating “career criminals.” Most of my clients are first time offenders, people who spent their entire lives contributing to society, paying taxes, exceling at their jobs and careers, and creating families. Suddenly they may find themselves accused of a crime they did not commit. Or, they may have reacted to a volatile situation in a panicked state of fear, and in a way that they are now facing a decade or more of prison time for. First time offenders may be guilty of a crime, but are they really the “dangerous criminals” that need to be locked up to truly protect society? I’m not buying it. The vast majority of people who are accused of a situational crime, one where a unique set of circumstances caused them to act in a way that is contradictory to the rest of their lifestyle and actions, will never again violate the law. It was aberrant behavior that will never be repeated. So should we lock these people up for years and years? I don’t think so.
Criminal acts have consequences – I think most people would agree that we must promote respect for our laws with a criminal justice system that punishes for criminal acts. However, what should that punishment be? How long should that punishment be? Is there an absolute need for that punishment to consist of years of prison time? Are there other options? Is there a better way?
I certainly think so. I welcome your thoughts.
Disclaimer (because I am a lawyer): This post and any legal information is provided for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice specific to you. The general information is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney in your jurisdiction. The attorney-client relationship is not established by this post.
Question EVERYTHING: A criminal defense blog
Welcome to my Blog!
Welcome to my first official blog post! I started Question EVERYTHING because I wanted a space to share my passion for criminal defense law. Deciding to become a criminal defense attorney was not simply a choice, it was more like a "calling." From my very first criminal justice 101 course in college, I was hooked. I loved that the law was always changing. And I became dedicated to challenging the many, many injustices in our system.
I now feel lucky to be able to make a living doing what I am passionate about, something that does not feel like a "job" because I truly enjoy what I do.
I started this blog because I want to share knowledge, inspire others to campaign for change in our criminal justice system, and have an outlet for ranting about some of the oppression that I see on a daily basis in our system.
I'll also share commentary on top media crime stories, shine a light on the dark hidden parts of our criminal justice system, and give information to help educate you about criminal law and procedure.
Feel free to post comments and share feedback.
"There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must NEVER be a time when we fail to protest." ~ Elie Wiesel
Disclaimer (because I am a lawyer): This post and any legal information is provided for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice specific to you. The general information is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney in your jurisdiction. The attorney-client relationship is not established by this post.