3 ms·

Good luck if you don't have the money for a good lawyer

by throwaway2048 6y ago

VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
you know the public defender legally has to do what you say right. you can insist on this psychological defense and they have no choice but to put it forward even if they think you're an idiot
- xenihn 6y ago
  what do you do when your public defender doesn't do what you tell them to do and you have no money?
  - VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
    then you file a grievance with the court and you get a new trial
- filmgirlcw 6y ago
  Of course. But how successful is that argument going to be when the public defender is juggling a dozen cases or more at once, meets with the defendant a handful of times before trial (if you’re lucky you can talk to a paralegal), and doesn’t have the resources of either time or money to dedicate to your case? Putting forward the defense is one thing. Crafting a compelling argument, writing an amazing brief that cites past case law and/or is persuasive enough to argue how something fits the required statues, and obtaining the best expert witnesses to bolster the argument is something else entirely.
- Fezzik 6y ago
  The amount of nonsense spewed about the legal system here on HN is sort of astonishing. A PD has absolutely no ethical or legal obligation to do anything of what a defendant says except in regards to the defendant testifying - you can advise your client not to testify, but they have a right to. Otherwise the PD, or any attorney for that matter, decides what evidence to use, what witnesses to call, and what the theory of the case is. And yes, I am attorney. No, this is not legal advice. Edit: apologies for the harsh intro tone. I had a long day of wrestling with disagreeable judges.
  - VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
    This is false. If the defendant feels they are being deprived of their right to adequate representation they can very easily file a grievance with the judge and get a new pd. In a case like this ignoring important evidence like psychological trauma would be grounds for the judge to replace the clients representation. So no, the public defender can't just ignore what their client wants with regard to how to defend their case.
    - phaus 6y ago
      >This is false. No its not. You are moving the goalposts. Obviously people can hire whatever lawyer they can afford and potentially change lawyers if they have a valid grievance that a judge agrees is a reason to allow it. They can also opt to attempt to defend themselves. In either case, the judge would probably tell you that its an incredibly stupid decision that you should reconsider in a very kind attempt to prevent you from ruining your life. There's a significant difference between "I can make my lawyer do whatever I want them to do because the law says they have to" and "I can get a new lawyer if my current lawyer doesn't agree with me."
      - VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
        If a public defender demonstrates a pattern of failing to provide adequate representation then they can be reprimanded by the court which carries both a legal and ethical consequence. So the point about the attorney not being legally or ethically required to represent the client as they wish is simply false.
        phaus 6y ago
        >failing to provide adequate representation This means they have to put an honest and significant effort into defending you to the best of their ability. They are responsible for the quality of their work, which is why they don't generally let the clients dictate the details of how they work or the overall strategy because the clients don't know what the fuck they are doing in virtually all cases where a lawyer isn't on trial. You keep trying to change the situations you are talking about and then pretend that they are the same.

Good luck if you don't have the money for a good lawyer

you know the public defender legally has to do what you say right. you can insist on this psychological defense and they have no choice but to put it forward even if they think you're an idiot

xenihn 6y ago
what do you do when your public defender doesn't do what you tell them to do and you have no money?
- VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
  then you file a grievance with the court and you get a new trial
filmgirlcw 6y ago
Of course. But how successful is that argument going to be when the public defender is juggling a dozen cases or more at once, meets with the defendant a handful of times before trial (if you’re lucky you can talk to a paralegal), and doesn’t have the resources of either time or money to dedicate to your case? Putting forward the defense is one thing. Crafting a compelling argument, writing an amazing brief that cites past case law and/or is persuasive enough to argue how something fits the required statues, and obtaining the best expert witnesses to bolster the argument is something else entirely.
Fezzik 6y ago
The amount of nonsense spewed about the legal system here on HN is sort of astonishing. A PD has absolutely no ethical or legal obligation to do anything of what a defendant says except in regards to the defendant testifying - you can advise your client not to testify, but they have a right to. Otherwise the PD, or any attorney for that matter, decides what evidence to use, what witnesses to call, and what the theory of the case is. And yes, I am attorney. No, this is not legal advice. Edit: apologies for the harsh intro tone. I had a long day of wrestling with disagreeable judges.
- VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
  This is false. If the defendant feels they are being deprived of their right to adequate representation they can very easily file a grievance with the judge and get a new pd. In a case like this ignoring important evidence like psychological trauma would be grounds for the judge to replace the clients representation. So no, the public defender can't just ignore what their client wants with regard to how to defend their case.
  - phaus 6y ago
    >This is false. No its not. You are moving the goalposts. Obviously people can hire whatever lawyer they can afford and potentially change lawyers if they have a valid grievance that a judge agrees is a reason to allow it. They can also opt to attempt to defend themselves. In either case, the judge would probably tell you that its an incredibly stupid decision that you should reconsider in a very kind attempt to prevent you from ruining your life. There's a significant difference between "I can make my lawyer do whatever I want them to do because the law says they have to" and "I can get a new lawyer if my current lawyer doesn't agree with me."
    - VWWHFSfQ 6y ago
      If a public defender demonstrates a pattern of failing to provide adequate representation then they can be reprimanded by the court which carries both a legal and ethical consequence. So the point about the attorney not being legally or ethically required to represent the client as they wish is simply false.
      - phaus 6y ago
        >failing to provide adequate representation This means they have to put an honest and significant effort into defending you to the best of their ability. They are responsible for the quality of their work, which is why they don't generally let the clients dictate the details of how they work or the overall strategy because the clients don't know what the fuck they are doing in virtually all cases where a lawyer isn't on trial. You keep trying to change the situations you are talking about and then pretend that they are the same.