Category Archives: Defense lawyering

How Bad Lawyering Advances Wrongful Conviction: The Case of Jamel Parker

We place tremendous emphasis on prosecutorial tunnel vision, and rightly so. However, bad lawyering by defense counsel rarely ever attract the same condemnation. Bad representation contribute significantly to incidences of wrongful convictions or miscarriage of justice, except that it hardly get mentioned. As Jamel Parker picks up the pieces of his appeal and plans to challenge his conviction, an important lesson needs to be learnt: that good representation is key to the fair dispensation of justice. I think this is a shared responsiblity. It lies not only with the accused person, it behooves the bench at every stage of the trial to ensure that an accused person is getting the best at every stage of the trial. Again, lax professional conduct rules; the failure of disciplinary boards to take seriously complaints by clients of bad lawyering, play a major role. We hope that Jamel’s second bite of the cherry (his proposed appeal) will ensure that all the facts and law are properly placed before a judge and jury. Read more herehttp://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-jamel-parker-wrongful-convicted/

Defense Lawyer Tunnel Vision…

Carrie Sperling

Carrie Sperling of the Arizona Justice Project has posted Defense Lawyer Tunnel Vision: The Oft-Ignored Rule Defense Counsel Plays in Wrongful Convictions on SSRN. Full paper here.

The abstract states:

This article discusses the sometimes forgotten role that defense lawyers play in wrongful convictions. Often, strong cases of actual innocence are thwarted by defense lawyers’ failure to preserve a defendant’s procedural avenues for relief. The article reminds lawyers that procedural errors have long-lasting consequences for the innocent who have been wrongly convicted.

Lawyers in UK claim new rules to ‘speed up’ trials resulting in miscarriages of justice

A new policy, called ‘Stop Delaying Justice’, introduced to ‘streamline’ trials in the lowers courts in England and Wales (the Magistrate’s Courts), may be leading to an increase in miscarriages of justice according to lawyers. The strict time restrictions are forcing people to plead guilty without seeing the evidence against them first. In one case, a defendant was asked to plead guilty before seeing crucial fingerprint evidence. He refused, and the fingerprint evidence later proved his innocence. Read more about the investigation into such cases on the BBC:

Lawyers claim new policy causes miscarriages of justice

Police study shows how stress distorts memory

As contributing editor Phil Locke noted in a post yesterday, eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions. The reason, the experts and defense attorneys argue, is that memory is extremely fallible and malleable. Police and prosecutors insist otherwise. They argue that a witness to a crime, or a victim of one, is going to remember quite clearly what happened and who was involved.

Now, a new study of what someone involved in a stressful, potentially life-threatening situation, remembers backs up those who argue that witnesses are prone to mistakes. What sets this study apart, however, is that the participants in the study were cops.

As this article about the study reports, “After traumatic incidents, some officers remember things that didn’t happen. Some don’t remember things that did happen. Others confuse the sequence of events.”

This is exactly what researchers and defense attorneys have been saying about civilian crime witnesses and victims for decades. It’s nice to have a police study back them up.

Central Park case showed how media fuels injustice

Sarah Burns’ book The Central Park Five: A Chronicle of a City Wilding, is one of the best books on a wrongful-conviction case in recent years. The documentary she is now producing with her father, Ken Burns, promises to be equally compelling.

The book and film focus on the wrongful conviction of five black and Latino teenagers in 1990 for the particularly vicious assault and rape of a white woman while jogging through New York’s famed Central Park on the evening of April 20, 1989.

The case set off a media frenzy in the crime-plagued city that soon spread across the United States after police announced that the five youths had confessed that they had committed the rape as one of a series of random assaults they and other teens committed in the park that night, a process they supposedly called “wilding.”

Burns adeptly dissects this case the skill of a surgeon. She shows how police jumped to conclusions and then manipulated and intimidated the five boys into highly inconsistent confessions that were greatly at odds with the facts. In the process, Burns shows how the police ignored the similarities between the rape of Continue reading

Brian Banks: The Case for Taking on Post Release Sex Offender Innocence Cases

Brian Banks had the world in his hands. He was a star high school football player. Every major college program in the country wanted him to play for them. There was already talk of an NFL career. That all ended when he was falsely accused of rape. His lawyer told him to plea bargain even though there was no physical evidence of the crime. He was told that he might spend the rest of his life in prison even though the case was built on the shaky testimony of his alleged victim, a fellow high school student.

Brian took the deal and went to prison for several years. His scholarship disappeared, his dreams disappeared, but when he got out of prison he was determined to get those dreams back. Had he been convicted of any other crime, even a murder, he would have had an easier time, but convicted sex offenders are in a class all their own. The time is never served. For the rest of his life he would be on sex offender lists, the government would need to know where he lived, and he would have trouble getting jobs or coping with the relationship issues that come with explaining to your girlfriend that you were convicted of rape, you plead, but you were actually innocent.

All innocence projects are overwhelmed with work. Thus, as directors we must make tough decisions about what cases to take on. In reviewing cases, priority is often determined based on the punishment the potentially innocent person is facing. Death penalty cases have the highest priority. Life cases are just behind them. Cases with significant terms of years are third. Most of us never get to the cases where a client has been released. There are too few resources. The cases take too much time and too much money.

Sex offender cases should be treated differently than other cases. They are life sentences. Brian’s case is a reminder of what gets taken away when someone is falsely accused of rape. It is also a call for all projects to at least consider taking on these cases.

Brian Banks Website

Thursday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Article on the Kevin Lane murder case, one of the cases being pushed by the Innocence Network UK for CCRC review
  • Cincinnati public defender ousted from office after one year due to scathing independent report of her management style
  • Innocence conference in Rochester, New York on April 20th featuring John Jay College psychology professor Saul Kassin, an expert in false confessions; Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project; John Jay College Professor Jennifer Dysart, an expert in eyewitness identification; Steven Barnes, who spent 20 years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit; and Eugene Pigott Jr., an associate judge on New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals
  • Article about exoneree Juan Rivera’s talk this week at Northern Illinois University
  • Joe McCulloch, director of the Palmetto Innocence Project in South Carolina, running for state Senate
  • Upcoming episode of U.S. TV show Pysch to focus on wrongful conviction case of an Innocence Project client
  • Death row exoneree Kirk Bloodsworth on Maryland’s annual failure to repeal the death penalty

Tuesday’s Quick Clicks…

A Plug …. for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

The 2012 National Innocence Network Conference has just concluded. The event was hosted this year by the University of Missouri Kansas City School of Law. We attend these events to sharpen our skills, increase our knowledge base, and forge relationships that will help us in our work; and this year’s conference did not disappoint.

On the Thursday prior to the conference, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) (www.nacdl.org) conducts a full day seminar/tutorial, usually on some aspect of litigating forensics.

Here is the agenda from this year’s session dealing with “forensic pathology”.

NACDL

They bring in recognized experts to speak, and the day is jammed full of relevant and useful information. They do an excellent job, and they offer this free of charge to “qualified” (defense/innocence work) attendees.

I have had the distinct pleasure of attending three of these events, and I would rate them as outstanding.

The NACDL is funded by:

  • Membership dues revenue;
  • Non-dues revenue such as CLE programs, publications, and product sales; and
  • Funding support, including external grants and internal fundraising.

This is an organization that deserves your support.

Phil Locke

Sunday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Recent Virginia exoneree Michael Hash enjoying his taste of freedom
  • Group of former judges and law enforcement officials file amicus brief asking appellate court to overturn a lower court decision awarding a new trial to Virginia death row inmate Justin Wolfe, who had his conviction overturned after the state’s key witness, a snitch, said he lied at trial to save his own skin
  • Sister of defendant in case that Innocence Network UK wants reviewed by CCRC for possible innocence says she will fight tooth and nail to keep her “guilty” sister from getting relief
  • Defendants in Virginia receive inadequate defense representation on a daily basis
  • Pending legislation in Hawaii would improve eyewitness id procedures
  • New York Times article on the fight of Kerry Max Cook to clear his name
  • Missouri AG signals in court filing that it will oppose the exoneration of Innocence Project client George Allen Jr., after DNA testing excludes him from semen found at crime scene

Li Zhuang: Chinese Defense Lawyer Who Was Found Guilty of Suborning Perjury

Background

In November 2007, Bo Xilai , one of the Chinese best-known politicians, was appointed as the Communist Party of China Chongqing Committee Secretary, first-in-charge of the Western interior municipality with 30 million people.

Bo initiated an ambitious campaign against organized crime in July 2009. It was directed at the gangsters and powerful officials who control the gangs and enable them to flourish. Wang Lijun, police chief of Chongqing, was the campaign’s overlord. Some 6,000 people, amongst whom were wealthy businessmen, police officers, judges and legislators, have been arrested.

Wang Lijun (left) and Bo Xilai

This powerful campaign drew national attention and brought fierce controversy. Many applauded it for making the city safer, but others criticized it for neglecting due process.

In the campaign, li Zhuang Case(李庄案) received the most attention. Li, a Beijing-based lawyer, was sentenced to eighteen months for perjury after his client, a suspected gangster, reported to the police that Li incited him to lie to the court that police officers tortured him during his interrogation.

This case galvanized lawyers across China. They support Li publicly, and criticize the Chongqing government sharply.

The Li Zhuang case is so important because it is an indicator of how far China has come on its legal reform,”said a Peking University law professor, He Weifang(贺卫方), who also posted a letter to the legal professionals in Chongqing on his blog. In the letter he claimed that the campaign causes people “to feel that time has been dialed back, that the Cultural Revolution is being replayed, and that the ideal of rule of law is right now being lost”.

Season 1

In June 2009, Gong Gangmo(龚刚模), an alleged mafia boss, was arrested by Chongqing police for a string of felonies that included murder, illegal weapons trade, drug Continue reading

Is Massachusetts Set to Reconsider Basis for granting Legal Aid?

If David Linsky (Massachesetts State Rep) gets his way with his proposed new legislation, legal aid might be considerably withered down for certain types of offenses. The time tested basis for grant of legal aid - ‘means and merits test’ - will no longer, in themselves, suffice. Not even the ‘sufficient benefit test’ will be available to a sizeable chunk of cases, which will not fall within the proposed new basis for grant of legal aid. The legislation as it is being proposed, intends to make the basis of provision of legal aid, not solely upon the economic condition of the defendant, but whether the defendant is facing jail time or not. This effectively becomes the new and overriding test for granting financial assistance.

The arguments, for and against, continue to swirl; but one thing appears almost certain, this is one way of depriving thousands their right to legal representation. The right to legal representation is one of the canons for a fair trial. Read a report of the pros and cons herehttp://www.lawcrossing.com/lcviewblog.php?id=20075&utm_source=WNW&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=t_15327-dt_20120327-cid_34015-Did_121-ad_attorney&ces=12705727&draft=121&cid=34015#

China’s Justice Ministry issued a notice demanding lawyers to take a loyalty oath to the Communist Party of China

Lawyers of Huainan City, Anhui Province pledge an oath of allegiance to the Communist Party of China

China’s Justice Ministry issued a notice on December 3, 2012 demanding that first-time applicants and lawyers who want to renew their licenses have to take a loyalty oath to the Communist Party. Details of the notice, availble here.

Here’s the full text of the oath, translated at Siweiluozi’s Blog:

I volunteer to become a practicing lawyer of the People’s Republic of China and promise to faithfully perform the sacred duties of a socialist-with-Chinese-characteristics legal worker ; to be faithful to the motherland and the people; to uphold the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party and the socialist system; to safeguard the dignity of the constitution and the law; to practice on behalf of the people; to be diligent, professional honest, and corruption-free; to protect the legitimate rights and interests of clients, the correct implementation of the law, and social fairness and justice; and diligently strive for the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics!

This notice raises much controversy, details here and here.

Matthew Puckett: The last hour or two, or Reprieve!

It now appears down to the US Supreme court to decide the fate of Matthew Puckett. His lawyers last week filed a petition with the supreme court for a reprieve. In the next couple of hours -that is, if the supreme court hasn’t already decided the petition for stay of execution, one way or the other; the State of Mississippi will either carry out the execution of Matthew Puckett, or grant him reprieve. Read views by Matthew Puckett himself and his supporters in The Republichttp://www.therepublic.com/view/story/c1713c9ba2024f66b35f204c243658d8/MS-Mississippi-Executions/

But there seems to be grave concerns from responsible quarters, that the trial leading to the conviction ‘may’ have been flawed in some way and therefore unsafe. There are procedural concerns; the quality of legal advice and representation that was available to him; circumstantial evidence which points in other possible directions. Matthew Puckett continue to deny he is guilty. Hear him - ’Like a lot of people, I thought if someone was convicted of a crime, they were probably guilty. But if this can happen to us, it can happen to anyone’.

The real concern here is the possibility of a wrongfully convicted person being executed; where that decision has been aided and abetted by the justice system. Jim Craig of the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center (a non profit law office) thinks the appeal was ‘fake’. He said further ‘We are here to, among other things, expose a fraud at the center of the Mississippi system of justice’.

We all hope there is still enough time left!

New U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel….

Full decision here.

MARTINEZ v. RYAN, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPART-MENT OF CORRECTIONS

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No. 10–1001. Argued October 4, 2011—Decided March 20, 2012

Arizona prisoners may raise claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel only in state collateral proceedings, not on direct review. In petitioner Martinez’s first state collateral proceeding, his counsel did not raise such a claim. On federal habeas review with new counsel, Martinez argued that he received ineffective assistance both at trial and in his first state collateral proceeding. He also claimed that he had a constitutional right to an effective attorney in the collateral proceeding because it was the first place to raise his claim of ineffec­tive assistance at trial. The District Court denied the petition, find­ing that Arizona’s preclusion rule was an adequate and independent state-law ground barring federal review, and that under Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U. S. 722, the attorney’s errors in the postconviction proceeding did not qualify as cause to excuse the procedural default. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed.

 

Held:

1. Where, under state law, ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claims must be raised in an initial-review collateral proceeding, a procedural default will not bar a federal habeas court from hearing those claims if, in the initial-review collateral proceeding, there was no counsel or counsel in that proceeding was ineffective. Pp. 5–14.

Saturday’s Quick Clicks…

Should Innocence Projects Publicly Disclose When The Investigation Shows Guilt? Medill IP Just Has….

Fisk Hall, Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University

The Medill Innocence Project apparently has adopted a new policy to publicly disclose facts uncovered in their investigation which suggest guilt. Their first disclosure of “bad facts” was this week. This policy raises interesting ethical and moral questions (as well as structural and administrative questions). From the article:

Last December the Medill Innocence Project posted on its website the results of a ten-week investigation into Gomez’s case by seven Northwestern students. They’d raised what the site called “serious questions” about Gomez’s conviction.

On Wednesday the Innocence Project did something remarkable. It posted new material on Gomez that challenges his claim that he’s innocent. The widow of Diaz is interviewed. “If he’s innocent, or not innocent, Continue reading

Bryant “Rico” Gaines to Walk Free Today in Ohio: Reflections on System Resistance to Innocence

Later today, Ohio Innocence Project client Bryant “Rico” Gaines will walk free after serving 9 years of a life sentence for a murder he did not commit. (Details of case, and grounds of innocence, available here). OIP attorney Karla Hall and Cincinnati defense attorney Bill Gallagher, along with scores of students, worked very hard over the years to bring about Rico’s freedom, and they deserve many congratulations. But Rico will not be going home cleared of all charges, despite the fact that he is innocent. He walks free today after deciding to take a plea deal to a reduced charge of “conspiracy to commit involuntary manslaughter.” His decision was simple. He has two daughters, including an 11-year old daughter that he has barely seen since she was 2 when Rico was locked up. Rico knows he had nothing to do with the murder in this case, but after having clear evidence of innocence in his favor for many years, and seeing how the prosecutors and courts refuse to listen, he decided that taking a plea and lying about his involvement in the murder was the price to pay for freedom and being reunited with his daughters immediately.

Rico’s case is a testament to three things: (1) how difficult it is for an innocent man to win his freedom when there is no DNA in his case; (2) the lengths that the system will go to deny admitting a mistake; and (3) how difficult it is for a Continue reading

DA-turned bestselling novelist reveals ‘dirty little secret”

William Landay’s brilliant new legal thriller, Defending Jacob, has created quite a buzz. It has been compared favorably with Scott Turow’s Presumed Innocent, which is pretty heady territory.

Like Turow, Landay is a former prosecutor. And like Turow, Landay issues an indictment of our criminal-justice system on several levels. Defending Jacob is not about a wrongful conviction. It is as much a family drama as it is a legal one, and it takes many dramatic turns before what one seasoned reviewer called its “astonishing” ending.

Continue reading

Defense attorneys sometimes are a hindrance to investigations

In the course of investigating a possible wrongful conviction, it’s not surprising to be stonewalled by police and prosecutors while attempting to gather case documents and evidence. But it is surprising how often original defense attorneys also stonewall post-conviction investigators.

It is well established in the United States, at least, that a client’s file is the client’s property. If a former client requests his or her file, the former attorney is obligated to turn it over. But that rule is frequently ignored if the former client is in prison.
In the past year, I have had four defense attorneys fail to turn over their former clients’ case files after submitting information releases signed by the former client. My experience with a West Virginia attorney fit a familiar pattern. My inmate-client and his outside supporter had told me they had made several requests for access to the case file in the dozen years since his conviction but the attorney had never responded.