3 ms·

Not only do you have the right, I don’t think it’s even legal for your lawyer to force you to plead one way or another. They can only suggest.

jerf 9y ago
This feels like a freshman law school essay problem, given after the class has just covered the nature of and reasons for our use of an adversarial system. In fact I suspect this will be showing up in such problems in the near future. We chose a system where lawyers are to do their best to defend their client, regardless, for various good historical reasons. In this situation, I would accept a defense lawyer basically immediately resting their case, if they truly have nothing with which to defend their client. But standing in front of the jury and actively pushing the same content as a guilty plea would contain is going to far. Alas, there is not a law against someone being an idiot in court, it isn't even obvious how one could possibly write that law, and if the client insists on an innocent plea, at the very least the defense is obligated to not actively contradict that plea, even if all that leaves them to do is say nothing. If you think prosecutors already have too much power, probably a pretty popular opinion around here, we certainly do not also want the defense to get into the prosecution game! Let the prosecution do its job, if it's so obvious what the verdict should be.
- matte_black 9y ago
  The thing that should stop a defense lawyer from working against their client is the chance of it harming their business. In this case, maybe this lawyer just doesn’t want to be a lawyer anymore.
  - roywiggins 9y ago
    It was a public defender, the client didn't have a choice to pick a different lawyer. It was this lawyer, or representing himself- unless he had the money for his own, which he didn't, because he had a public defender appointed.
    - logfromblammo 9y ago
      Article states that public defender was replaced by someone hired by his parents. I'm going to hazard a guess that they could not afford to hire from the top quartile of criminal defense attorneys in the state.
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    He wasn't working against his client. His client was facing the death penalty, an the lawyer was trying to get him a lesser sentence.
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      Incompetently trying to get him a lesser sentence. He straight out declared that his client was guilty in favor of a defense that legally was not allowed.
fjsolwmv 9y ago
The title is an obvious lie. The lawyer did not pleqd guilty.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  He told the jury the defendant was obviously guilty, which seems tantamount to not letting the guy plead not guilty.
Bartweiss 9y ago
Apparently Louisiana is arguing "Because McCoy did not try to fire his lawyer until just days before the trial, the state contends that he had let the lawyer dictate legal strategy." This is bizarre to me. They're not saying he didn't try to fire the lawyer, they're saying he did but it doesn't count. Can anyone explain that argument in any more detail?

jerf 9y ago

This feels like a freshman law school essay problem, given after the class has just covered the nature of and reasons for our use of an adversarial system. In fact I suspect this will be showing up in such problems in the near future. We chose a system where lawyers are to do their best to defend their client, regardless, for various good historical reasons. In this situation, I would accept a defense lawyer basically immediately resting their case, if they truly have nothing with which to defend their client. But standing in front of the jury and actively pushing the same content as a guilty plea would contain is going to far. Alas, there is not a law against someone being an idiot in court, it isn't even obvious how one could possibly write that law, and if the client insists on an innocent plea, at the very least the defense is obligated to not actively contradict that plea, even if all that leaves them to do is say nothing. If you think prosecutors already have too much power, probably a pretty popular opinion around here, we certainly do not also want the defense to get into the prosecution game! Let the prosecution do its job, if it's so obvious what the verdict should be.

matte_black 9y ago
The thing that should stop a defense lawyer from working against their client is the chance of it harming their business. In this case, maybe this lawyer just doesn’t want to be a lawyer anymore.
- roywiggins 9y ago
  It was a public defender, the client didn't have a choice to pick a different lawyer. It was this lawyer, or representing himself- unless he had the money for his own, which he didn't, because he had a public defender appointed.
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    Article states that public defender was replaced by someone hired by his parents. I'm going to hazard a guess that they could not afford to hire from the top quartile of criminal defense attorneys in the state.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  He wasn't working against his client. His client was facing the death penalty, an the lawyer was trying to get him a lesser sentence.
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    Incompetently trying to get him a lesser sentence. He straight out declared that his client was guilty in favor of a defense that legally was not allowed.

fjsolwmv 9y ago

The title is an obvious lie. The lawyer did not pleqd guilty.

emodendroket 9y ago
He told the jury the defendant was obviously guilty, which seems tantamount to not letting the guy plead not guilty.

Bartweiss 9y ago

Apparently Louisiana is arguing "Because McCoy did not try to fire his lawyer until just days before the trial, the state contends that he had let the lawyer dictate legal strategy." This is bizarre to me. They're not saying he didn't try to fire the lawyer, they're saying he did but it doesn't count. Can anyone explain that argument in any more detail?