Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Without an Attorney, Boy Falters Before Judge
St. Petersburg Times ^ | 5/28/02 | Kathryn Wexler

Posted on 05/28/2002 5:04:16 PM PDT by marshmallow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 next last
To: BraveMan
Juan Carlos Elias will end up wriggling out of the ordered restitution of $4,608.94 (the victim's out of pocket costs, according to the article) because some lawyer with a burning desire to see his/her name in the St. Petersburg Times will petition an appelate court to overturn the judgement because Elias' rights to due process were "violated". Yet everybody is OK with that presumably because of their undying love and respect for the Constitution….Yea, thats it. Absolve the perp of responsibility for his actions, screw the victim out of the court ordered (fair and reasonable) restitution, screw the taxpayers with a six figure court cost invoice, smack down the newbie judge, all in the name of protecting the Constitution…I must have mistakenly logged on to the Democratic Underground, because this hue and cry makes no sense to me at all.

No one is absolved of anything. I suspect this gets solved easily, worst case retry the penalty phase, at the taxpayers expense, as happens when public servants let us down. Hopefully, the judge learned a lesson.

Do you the Constitution should be respected only selectively? How do you determine when?

You’ll find that activist approach all over DU.

141 posted on 05/29/2002 2:13:46 PM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
I do believe that's what I've been saying, but it's falling on deaf ears.

Blind justice, deaf ears.

142 posted on 05/29/2002 2:16:29 PM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: mlo
"More importantly, what about a judge that doesn't follow the law? Isn't that more important than this kids movies?"

Of course the judges actions are more important than this kids movies. What do the kids movies have to do with anything? Maybe if the kid really liked action-adventure movies with lots of violence an stuff that might mean something, I just dunno.

143 posted on 05/29/2002 2:21:41 PM PDT by slouper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Do you [think/feel] the Constitution should be respected only selectively? How do you determine when?

Unfortunately for all of us, the litigious society we live in tends to be the antithesis of common sense. I would hope that a wise lawyer would only require a fleeting glance at this debacle to convince him/herself that defense of the Constitution is not required in this instance; to turn the other cheek as it were. Leave defense of the Constitution in this instance to the Hucksters and Charlatans of the Bar Association . . .

How do I personally determine when? Sandlot rules; No Harm, No Foul. . .

144 posted on 05/29/2002 2:43:46 PM PDT by BraveMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
Seems to me like a lot of non-members of the Florida Bar are commenting on this.

What do you actually know about this proceeding? In Florida, a restitution hearing may be an equivalent to a sentencing "hearing" in other states, where the "hearing" is nothing other than the judge sentencing the guilty party.

This case was already decided....WITH an attorney.

Furthermore this was a juvenile case sentencing.

I’ll stay my opinion of the judge because I don’t know Florida law.

145 posted on 05/29/2002 2:56:21 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BraveMan
I would hope that a wise lawyer would only require a fleeting glance at this debacle to convince him/herself that defense of the Constitution is not required in this instance; to turn the other cheek as it were.

I agree completely, and I hope it turns out that way. Whether a "wise lawyer" or a harried pd, thats the advice he'll get, which is why they needed to get him one in the first place.

146 posted on 05/29/2002 3:23:23 PM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
Seems to me like a lot of non-members of the Florida Bar are commenting on this.
What do you actually know about this proceeding? In Florida, a restitution hearing may be an equivalent to a sentencing "hearing" in other states, where the "hearing" is nothing other than the judge sentencing the guilty party.

Don't need to be a FL Bar member to comment on FR. We could ping some, but why make a federal case of it.

The article makes it clear that he wanted an attorney, didn't understand the proceedings, but also notes

Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender Bob Dillinger (FL bar I'm sure) said he has never seen a juvenile represent himself during such a hearing

George Richards (FL bar), deputy chief of the juvenile division at the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office, said indigent youths are appointed an attorney unless they specifically decline one

Judy Estren (FL Bar), executive assistant public defender at the Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender's Office, said the co-defendant's attorney should have intervened. "I would have instructed my attorney to jump in."

The judge screwed up. Glad it was a little error.

147 posted on 05/29/2002 3:31:20 PM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

Comment #148 Removed by Moderator

Comment #149 Removed by Moderator

To: sarasmom
i think this is the excuse Klintoon used each time he followed the "hildabeasts" advice and she was wrong every time.....only she would not let him have anything but an ashtray "up side his head" the FJB!!!!!!!!! "
150 posted on 05/29/2002 3:50:19 PM PDT by cajun-jack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ex con
What some of have done is explain the law and the Constitution.

Ae you suggesting you have a Constitutional right to counsel in a civil proceeding? Do you contend this kid was entitled to the services of a taxpayer-paid public defender in connection with a civil restitution matter in which he stood no risk of incarceration?

151 posted on 05/29/2002 3:53:34 PM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: ex con
I want every person who walks into a US courtroom to be innocent until proven guilty, and to get a trial according to the Constitution. No matter if they wear nice clothes, are dumb,smart,white,black, brown, rich, poor, or whatever.

These are terms appropriate to a criminal proceeding. You do understand that, don't you? There is a whole bundle of Supreme Court decisions that imposes these requirements on the criminal courts. Did you know that?

152 posted on 05/29/2002 4:02:47 PM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

Comment #153 Removed by Moderator

To: ex con
Suppose a person is duly convicted of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt following a painstaking trial that costs the taxpayers of the state $150,000 including the costs of a court-appointed attorney for the offender. As part of that trial it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender caused property damage to an innocent victim.

Now suppose the state initiates a civil restitution proceeding to recoup the costs of the damages on behalf of the victim. The criminal complains he can't understand the proceedings and ought to have his court-appointed attorney (at a cost of $10,000) to help him out.

Now suppose the criminal suffered personal injuries of his own when he slipped on a banana peel left lying on his victim's sidewalk. The neighbor is a man of modest means and cannot afford to retain an attorney. All he owns is his home but that's sufficient to entice a bottom-feeder lawyer to represent the criminal on a 40 percent contingency fee arrangement based on the assumed value of the home. The criminal sues the victim. The victim complains he can't understand the proceedings and asks for a court-appointed attorney (at a taxpayer cost of $10,000) to represent him.

Which, if either, of these two men has a Constitutional right to an attorney? Why?

154 posted on 05/29/2002 4:22:45 PM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: ex con
No, you don't understand. The restitution phase is governed by civil liability standards--not criminal standards--and for good reason. Guilt has already been proven at great cost to taxpayers under the stricter standards. Assessing restitution does not place the criminal at risk of incarceration and so he is entitled to no greater protection than any other Joe Blow citizen who has been sued in civil proceedings for such property damage.

Whta you are proposing is that special privileges be provided at taxpayer expense to a criminal that a law-abiding citizen cannot get. How is that fair and just?

155 posted on 05/29/2002 4:30:02 PM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: ex con
the judge will get slapped down over this without a doubt.
As he should !

156 posted on 05/29/2002 4:33:16 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender Bob Dillinger (FL bar I'm sure) said he has never seen a juvenile represent himself during such a hearing

Public Defender i.e. not a credible source of impartial opinion.  Might as well ask a debtors' attorney about impartial Bankruptcy "fairness".

George Richards (FL bar), deputy chief of the juvenile division at the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office, said indigent youths are appointed an attorney unless they specifically decline one

At a trial yes, but at a reading of a sentence? - again, the article never states if a defendant is entitled to an attorney at this type of hearing.  There are legal proceedings where sentencing can be handed down after a trial,  without a court proceeding.  If you don't have an attorney present in your house when you receive a sentence mailed to you can you appeal based on lack of representation?  Even if you were represented in the trial?  

Sentencing is often a formality.  Frequently, the sentence is written by the judge in his or her chambers.  The "hearing" where it is presented is not a "hearing" per se...it's just when the sentence is formally entered into the record and the defendant often has no right to say anything at that "hearing".  Was this the case here?  Was Richards statement being taken out of context?

There's a ton of questions this article never raises or answers or puts in their proper legal perspective.

Judy Estren (FL Bar), executive assistant public defender at the Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender's Office, said the co-defendant's attorney should have intervened. "I would have instructed my attorney to jump in."

Another "not credible" source....well, maybe credible but, hardly impartial.

These are all just questions that are popping into my mind because I was the legal assistant to the Head Counsel of Seafirst Bank for 5 years.

This article is sloppy as hell.

 

157 posted on 05/29/2002 5:56:15 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

Comment #158 Removed by Moderator

Comment #159 Removed by Moderator

Comment #160 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson