Lubbock Criminal Defense Lawyers Association

More good news! � The Commissioners Court approved the Electronic Remote Access Policy this morning, so we are close to rolling this out to the attorney and public.

Congratulations to Rayme Shackelford for a great win in 364th District Court today. It was a felony DWI, enhanced to a second-degree felony due to a prior pen trip.

Very interesting facts: stop was for failing to dim bright lights. An open beer can was found in the vehicle, along with 17 full. Rayme’s hero told cop he had a broken toe and that he needed to pee. So, the officer graciously let the handcuffed citizen out of his patrol car, put his camera on him and allowed him to piss his pants and remain outside in the 37-degree Lubbock cold, as the officer took a personal call, and then inventoried the client’s vehicle. (Rayme’s jury argument: “Where’s the humanity?” – sounds like something from a movie I saw once upon a time.)

Rayme’s client took the breath test, but fortunately there was no 0.020 agreement. When asked to resubmit to the breath test, the client refused and didn’t answer further questions. Rayme got a 38.23 instruction regarding the bright lights not being operable. The offer was five years in prison. The jury of ten women and two men took three hours to render a just and fair verdict of “NOT GUILTY!”

Good job, Shack!

David Slayton sent me the link below. � You can access Lubbock County Jail information from this site, instead of calling the jail desk for information. You can click on the click, pull up a roster, and even print the jail card.

http://www.co.lubbock.tx.us/Sheriff/reports.htm

Also, he said that the Commissioner’s Court will make their ruling regarding allowing remote access to the Case Analysis system at the Monday, March 26 meeting. � If they approve it, and David thinks they will, access will be in effect beginning on April 2, 2007.

Many years ago, a controversial ethics opinion from the State Bar of Texas was issued (No. 392), stating that a lawyer may not ethically electronically record a telephone conversation between the lawyer and a client or third party without first informing the other party to the call that the conversation is being recorded.

Since such recording is not illegal in Texas or under federal law, this caused much consternation among members of the Bar, even though the State Bar General Counsel’s office had a policy not to enforce grievances in such matters.

Now, the State Bar’s Professional Ethics Committee has issued a new opinion, which goes the other way. Now, a lawyer MAY electronically record a telephone conversation between the lawyer and a client or a third party without first informing the other party to the call that the conversation is being recorded.

The full opinion is set out in this month’s Texas Bar Journal at:

http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Texas_Bar_Journal1&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=17263

As many of you already know from the emails you have received, we are going to start using Google Groups to communicate. Eventually, the plan is to phase out the current Members Only section with the Google Group site. The hope is to replace the glitchy and hacker-prone system with a stable and secure one.

Here are a few advantages of Google Groups:

• It’s intuitive. It uses either an email interface like other list serves, or can be purely Internet-based like the current Members Only site. Anyone who can use the Internet or read email can use it.
• It’s efficient. Members can subscribe or unsubscribe automatically or limit the way the discussions are received.
• It’s flexible. You can either interact on the web site or by reading and responding through email.
• Brief Bank & file sharing. With the ability to store up to 100MB per group, and the ease in which anyone can share files, it will encourage file-sharing rather than discourage it. There will be no more hunting for briefs, forms, and other files because they’ll all be kept in one place.
• It’s Google. Google has proven to be a lasting force, and their services are aimed at increasing the usefulness of the Internet.
• It’s permanent! Unless they decide to cancel the program, which is highly unlikely, there will never again be the need to change the format. This could be the final change.

Of course, there is one “disadvantage,” and that is everyone must register an account with Google. But many people already have Google accounts, and having to register is no different from any other site.

To visit the Google Group page for LCDLA, click here: http://groups.google.com/group/lcdla

The following is a report from Sarah Mitchell Gunter, chair of the committee that is studying the problem of bond forfeitures in CCL#1. Please respond with any input to Sarah at: sarahmgunter@gmail.com

I sat down with Kay Alexander yesterday to discuss the situation in county court 1. I think that, to get anywhere, I need to visit with the judge and Kay together; the major problem they have is lack of communication. So, if we can nail down what it is that each/both of them wants, we can likely get somewhere. However, the judge will be unavailable for that sit-down until at least early April. In the meantime, I visited with Kay about why the bond forfeitures are happening and what we can do to prevent it. What it boils down to is this: if she does not see you in person and physically hand you a setting notice at the PNC, your client will receive a bond forfeiture. She has a list of rules for PNCs posted on her door. (If you have not seen them or would like to be refreshed as to what they are, please let me know; I will get them to you.)

There are a few unlisted addendums to that list of rules. They are: a phone announcement will not be accepted and will result in a bond forfeiture; a note will not be accepted and will result in a bond forfeiture; the ONLY acceptable form of an announcement is in person on the date of the PNC. Even if there is a long line that you don’t want to wait in, it is in your client’s best interest to wait because a failure to speak personally with Kay is the quickest way to get a BF. This, of course, begs the question of what to do when Kay is not there. She prefers you wait, as she will be right back. In the even that you can’t wait, there is a hierarchy of people you can go to in her absence. First, go to Veda Wright. If Veda is not in her office, go see Mary Koontz. If Mary is not in her office, go see Brandy Loya.

If you speak to the judge about resetting a PNC and you don’t also speak with Kay, your client will most likely get a BF. In other words, if you can’t attend the PNC and the judge tells you to have Kay reset it, Kay still expects a motion for continuance. The rule is that the continuance has to be granted at least 1 day before the PNC. I asked her what to do if something came up the day of the PNC; if that happens, you are to get someone to cover your PNC.

Another rule is that your client does not have to attend the 1st PNC, unless there is an active warrant. If your client has an active warrant and does not appear, regardless of which number PNC it is, there will be a BF called. Since we don’t always know about any outstanding warrants, Kay suggests it would be best to just always have your client there.

A warning to each of us: even if you attend the PNC, and even if other attorneys see you there and vouch for you to Kay, a BF will still issue if you don’t speak to Kay. Specifically, she cited a problem with attorneys not wanting to wait in line to see her and leaving; other attorneys will say they saw that particular attorney there, but, if Kay didn’t see that attorney, there will be a BF called.

This is pretty untenable, unworkable, and makes life that much harder on all of us, but, unfortunately, we are being punished for a handful of attorneys who have apparently been less than truthful about their attendance at PNC’s.

One other thing Kay has told me is that she is frustrated with the PNC system, as well, and is looking to revamp it. That is another thing she, the judge and I will discuss. She says she’ll entertain suggestions on how to improve it. So, forward your suggestions to me, and I’ll see that they get to the judge and Kay. Please do not hesitate to contact me if any of this is unclear or if you have any questions.

Sarah

Last week, Jeff Sheets and I tried an aggravated assault/deadly weapon case in Hockley County, ultimately working out a satisfactory deal for misdemeanor deadly conduct with no deadly weapon finding. Since the client was a resident alien, we struggled with immigration consequences of various lesser-included offenses to request in the charge. During our research Jeff found this excellent link that charts Immigration Consequences of Selected Texas Offenses.

This is an excellent resource:
Immigration Consequences of Selected Texas Offenses

Chuck Lanehart
Court Liaison

Don’t miss out on the topics from this outstanding program recently co-sponsored by the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers (TCDLA) and Lubbock Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (LCDLA).

Choose from:
- Court of Criminal Appeals
- Defending Computer Crime & Law Office Computer Technology
- Domestic Assault
- DWI: Defense, Common Problems & Solutions, Jury Selection Techniques & Experts
- Ethically Representing the High Profile Case
- Ethics: Avoiding the Process
- Evidentiary Issues & Motion Practice
- Eyewitness Identification
- Federal Practice Tips & Traps
- Franchise Tax for Lawyers
- Innocence Can Take Many Forms
- Juvenile Law
- Preserving Error
- Search & Seizure and Statements
- Upcoming Legislative Highlights

= = = = = = = = = = =

If you missed this recent seminar, you still have three ways to get the latest updates from leading practitioners in criminal law.

ONE: Watch or listen to the presentations online anytime for MCLE participatory credit. Follow the link below for specific topic information or to register for all or part of this course in the Online Classroom.
Click here to search.

TWO: If you are just interested in the course materials, you can now download them from the Online Library, which houses over 8,000 fully searchable TexasBarCLE articles. Subscribe for an annual fee and download all you want, or purchase individual articles as you need them.

ACT NOW – Offer Expires May 31st: Use this special code to get $75 OFF the regular one-year subscription price of $295: 0705319999. Visit the Online Library here to subscribe.

THREE: Order the course book and DVD. Our Custom CLE staff will ship the materials you need to hold your own MCLE-accredited program. Call 800-204-2222, x 1575 for more information, or click here to access the order form for this course (PDF file)

AG Opinion, March 3, 2007: The State Office of Administrative Hearings is not required to furnish a free transcript in an administrative driver’s license suspension appeal.

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/op50abbott/ga-0524.htm

The hearing for Angie Trout’s Motion for Sanctions against CPS is Monday March 5th at 1:15.