Legal Questions for Our VERIFIED Lawyers #1

[AZlawyer]

re bold above, so then the defense can't use 'oh I wasn't able to depose so and so' for appeal or argument purposes at trial, right? If he doesn't do it by deadline, he can't cry about it later either, correct? TIA

Sure he can. I don't think it will work with HHJP, but JB can always whine to the appellate court about it too.

If there really is a good reason for not completing the depo in time--like if it is a depo of a critical witness, it was scheduled ahead of time for the last day before the deadline, but then the witness breaks his leg and has to go to the ER--even HHJP will soften up on the deadlines.

 

[AZlawyer]

Is the "waiver" the same as the "stipulations" that Judge P said Inmate Anthony MUST sign, which Ashton prepared for the entomology evidence, and the hair evidence, and the laundry bag and shorts?

Is the entomology evidence and hair evidence also leaving the state's custody to be independently tested by the defense? If so, I'm sure that's what they were talking about.

 

[ThinkTank]

Is the entomology evidence and hair evidence also leaving the state's custody to be independently tested by the defense? If so, I'm sure that's what they were talking about.

Yes, Ashton said the State is sending the entomology evidence to the Defense expert, Dr. Huntington, and will also be sending the hair evidence to Defense experts.

 

[faefrost]

The consequences, if the deadlines are really firm, is that you don't get to do things after the deadlines. I.e., if you have a deadline of 10/31/10 to complete 8 law enforcement depos, and you don't do it, then you don't get to take those depos.

What are the consequences in Florida of not taking the depo's? Is a deposition required before they can testify at trial, to prevent "Perry Mason" moments? Or is it simply that the lawyer has no idea or control over what the witnessed called will say or do?

 

[bananarama]

Regarding the Motion to Determine Reasonable Budget for Due Process Costs in a Capital Case and Motion to incur certain Specified Costs 9-30-2010:

If any portion of this motion is approved, will the work only be completed if ICA is convicted, or can they start this nonsense now? TIA!!!

 

[AZlawyer]

What are the consequences in Florida of not taking the depo's? Is a deposition required before they can testify at trial, to prevent "Perry Mason" moments? Or is it simply that the lawyer has no idea or control over what the witnessed called will say or do?

Depositions are not required but are very helpful if you want to be prepared for what a witness is likely to say at trial.

 

[AZlawyer]

Regarding the Motion to Determine Reasonable Budget for Due Process Costs in a Capital Case and Motion to incur certain Specified Costs 9-30-2010:

If any portion of this motion is approved, will the work only be completed if ICA is convicted, or can they start this nonsense now? TIA!!!

Oh, they would have to start now, because there are deadlines relating to the penalty phase that are coming up soon.

But I thought HHJP had already decided what was reasonable for, e.g., penalty phase private investigator time, etc.?? :waitasec:

 

[tragco]

What would happen if, say, a week before trial ICA said she was no longer satisfied with her lawyers and wanted new representation?

Thanks to all our verified lawyers. You are invaluable.

 

[zoey]

What would happen if, say, a week before trial ICA said she was no longer satisfied with her lawyers and wanted new representation?

Thanks to all our verified lawyers. You are invaluable.

I saw this once on Court TV....the Judge more or less told the defendent tough---had one of the partners take over...but it was day one or two of the trial...I wouldn't doubt this defense pulling this at trial either

 

[ZsaZsa]

AZ- these persistent motions by JB to have KC's visitor logs/purchases/phone calls excluded from being public information. If he were to succeed with this motion eventually, would all her previous calls ( the Waste of time one particularly) be excluded and then not allowed as evidence? I don't think he really cares if we know how many Skittles she eats, he has an ulterior purpose with these motions....

 

[Riley1833]

What if both Mason and Finnell resigned. Since they are both pro bono can they do as LKB did and resign? Could the court then appoint a PD? Or would everything come to a halt until Baez found and pro bono death qualified attorney?

 

[denjet]

Now that we're getting closer to the time when Jose has to disclose evidence he will use at trial which I'm assuming includes reports/research done by his experts ... does he have to disclose incriminating evidence or can he just disclose what he deems exculpatory? My understanding is the prosecution has to disclose both but is the defense held to the same rule?
Thanks in advance!

PS Does anyone know how to bump this thread so it appears on the first page of threads?

 

[logicalgirl]

Now that we're getting closer to the time when Jose has to disclose evidence he will use at trial which I'm assuming includes reports/research done by his experts ... does he have to disclose incriminating evidence or can he just disclose what he deems exculpatory? My understanding is the prosecution has to disclose both but is the defense held to the same rule?
Thanks in advance!

PS Does anyone know how to bump this thread so it appears on the first page of threads?

Sorry O/T, but LOL Denjet - do just what you did - post a comment - or just say "bumping this thread" and it comes up to the most recent threads.

 

[denjet]

Sorry O/T, but LOL Denjet - do just what you did - post a comment - or just say "bumping this thread" and it comes up to the most recent threads.

DUH! :doh:
Thanks .. :blushing:

 

[logicalgirl]

DUH! :doh:
Thanks .. :blushing:

LOL - OT again - it took me ages to figure that out!:blowkiss:

 

[Nore]

LOL - OT again - it took me ages to figure that out!:blowkiss:

------------------

gotta keep it at the top,we will need it.:back::Banane54::bananalama::U There::toast: thats all folks!!!!

 

[Katprint]

What would happen if, say, a week before trial ICA said she was no longer satisfied with her lawyers and wanted new representation?

Thanks to all our verified lawyers. You are invaluable.

I posted my opinion about this a few days ago: [ame="http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showpost.php?p=14636677&postcount=924"]In Session Message Boards - View Single Post - Nov 4 - Nov 10[/ame]


"Casey would not be the first murder defendant to do that LOL! The courts deal with this all the time.

My opinion: The defense attorneys remain "attorney of record" until the Judge allows them to withdraw. I expect the attorneys would file an emergency motion to withdraw from further representation based on Casey "firing" them.

If Casey had another attorney lined up who was death-qualified and willing to take over, the judge might let them have a short continuance if they could show "good cause." For example, if the lead attorney's wife was due to give birth that day and had gone into labor that morning then they might get a week. If an earthquake/hurricane/flood/fire destroyed the attorney's office including their case files, then they might get a month. In the meantime, Casey continues to sit in jail serving life on the installment plan.

If Casey doesn't have another attorney lined up, the judge would probably hold an in camera hearing on why she had fired her attorneys. There was a Florida case where a criminal defense attorney was coercing his client to have sexual relations. He told his client, "The happier you keep me, the harder I will work.” http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-supreme-court/1193976.html The client complained to the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement and they investigated. The defense attorney withdrew from further representation on the grounds of "conflict of interest" and the public defender was appointed to represent the client.

So, if Casey has a good reason for firing her attorneys, the judge would appoint the public defender to represent her (and would probably order her attorneys to give back the attorneys fees they were paid.) If Casey did not have any good reason for firing her attorneys then she probably would not be allowed to fire them "on an F-ing whim" as they say.

Plus, Casey doesn't gain much from delaying this trial since she is already incarcerated. If she really thinks she will be acquitted - or even convicted of a lesser offense like manslaughter which she has already served a substantial part of the possible sentence - then she should be eager to get the trial over with so she can get out of jail. If she is *that* afraid of being convicted of First Degree Murder with Special Circumstances and sentenced to death, she needs to get a good negotiator like Terence Lenamon to negotiate a plea agreement. I think Casey *should* be afraid of being convicted and having the death penalty imposed. However, indefinitely delaying the trial is not the best way to avoid the death penalty IMO."

Katprint
Always only my own opinions

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ- these persistent motions by JB to have KC's visitor logs/purchases/phone calls excluded from being public information. If he were to succeed with this motion eventually, would all her previous calls ( the Waste of time one particularly) be excluded and then not allowed as evidence? I don't think he really cares if we know how many Skittles she eats, he has an ulterior purpose with these motions....

IIRC, Jose has not (recently) asked for recordings of phone calls to be excluded, just for the logs of calls and visitors to be excluded. But in any event, excluding something from being released to the public under the Sunshine Laws and excluding something from being used as evidence at trial are two completely different things. IMO the "waste of time" call in particular will not be excluded from the trial.

What if both Mason and Finnell resigned. Since they are both pro bono can they do as LKB did and resign? Could the court then appoint a PD? Or would everything come to a halt until Baez found and pro bono death qualified attorney?

The last DP qualified attorney to stick around on this case will have a tough time getting out. The judge will want someone else waiting in the wings before letting the last person go free.

Now that we're getting closer to the time when Jose has to disclose evidence he will use at trial which I'm assuming includes reports/research done by his experts ... does he have to disclose incriminating evidence or can he just disclose what he deems exculpatory? My understanding is the prosecution has to disclose both but is the defense held to the same rule?
Thanks in advance!

PS Does anyone know how to bump this thread so it appears on the first page of threads?

There are some potentially inculpatory things that Jose would have to disclose, if they exist:

1) Any written or recorded statement of any of his trial witnesses; and

2) Any reports or statements by any defense expert, including results of tests, experiments, or comparisons.

Thanks for the bump--I had lost track of this thread.

 

[5stars]

Is it normal for a lawyer to wait two years to test everything before the trial?

 

[Katprint]

Is it normal for a lawyer to wait two years to test everything before the trial?

It depends on whether the lawyer thinks the test results will be useful or will merely create/preserve unfavorable evidence.

For example, in a wrongful death case where a homeless man lying passed out in an alley was run over by a garbage truck backing itself into position to lift a dumpster, the woman claiming to be the wife of the deceased turned out not to have been legally married to the deceased and thus she did not have standing to sue. It was possible but unlikely that a child of the deceased's "wife"/girlfriend might have been the deceased's biological child despite the deceased's name not being on the child's birth certificate and thus would have standing to sue as the heir of the deceased (with the non-wife as Guardian Ad Litem for the son.)

A strategic decision was made by the defense team not to test the DNA of the child. However, if the non-wife's attorneys had produced a medical report on DNA test results purporting to show that the child was the biological child of the deceased, the defense team would definitely have run its own tests in an independent lab. If a marriage license can be forged, so can a lab test result.

I don't know that the defense would benefit from proving the death-banded hairs found in Casey's car came from some other little (able to fit in the tiny trunk) dead person. I can see why they might want to prove that the discolorations are death-bands; it would be helpful if they had some forensic hair expert who would testify that the discolorations were the result of hair straightener or hair dye or dye rubbing off of hair bands or Caylee playing with marking pens or some other cause unrelated to death. But going along with Cindy's "we cremated some other child, not Caylee" madness?

I think the defense is grasping at straws. They really cannot see the forest for the trees.

Katprint
Who frequently changed her babies' diapers, clothing etc. on the go in her
car trunk / hatchback areas, undoubtedly resulting in loose hairs being left behind
Always only my own opinions