Legal Antics

It's a reasonable request.

Via On the Record in Cook County :

Defense Counsel - I need at least 25 pages to summarize all my legal arguments your honor.

Judge - You can write 25 pages counselor so long as you tell me which 15 pages I should read.

Defense Counsel - Should I put that in the Order?

Judge - No.

 

That's his story and he's sticking to it!

Image by beingkatie via Flickr

Via Overheard in Court:

Q. I take it that before this accident happened you lived with your brother in-law and sister for about six months?

A. Yes.

Q. You got to know him quite well?

A. Yes.

Q. And you saw him interact with your sister, and I believe they had one child?

A. I didn’t see the actual interaction, but they did have one child.

Doh!

Just Being Honest…

(pro se defendant cross-examining his accuser)

DEFENDANT: You sell drugs out of your house, don’t you?

WITNESS: No.

DEFENDANT: I know that’s a damn lie. I’ve bought weed and crack there myself.

Via Overheard in Court.

Any Star Trek reference is a winner in my book.

Image via Wikipedia

Spock, can you hear me?

JUDGE: Is there anything else you would like to say before I pass sentence?

DEFENDANT: Yes, Kirk to Enterprise- Beam me up.

Via Overheard in Court

Hard to argue with that--it's technically correct.

Via a new blog, Overheard in Court, comes the following:

Testimony from a child witness.

Q. Where do you live?

A. Across the street from my neighbors.

*****

(Overheard in Court is currently holding a contest for the funniest courtroom transcripts, so head on over and check it out).

The poor guy--I'm sure he'd rather keep that kind of thing private.

It's a common theme amongst public defenders:

Defendant - Judge, I want another public defender, because this man is incontinent.

Via On the Record in Cook County.

But, he looks like a prisoner.

Surprisingly, (ok, not surprisingly), an appellate court concluded that the following was not acceptable:

(Whereupon, the following proceedings were held outside the presence and hearing of the jury.)

COURT: All right.  Mr. Shaw, let’s have an understanding here.  Listen to me.

DEFENDANT: I brought –-

COURT: I’m asking you to listen to me, and I’m telling you what is going to happen.

DEFENDANT: You’ve already denied me due process of law, sir.

COURT: Get the duct tape out.

(Whereupon, court remained in adjournment.  At which time the Defendant was bound and gagged.)

Shaw v. State, 846 S.W.2d 482 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1993).

 

The appellate court held that defendant had been unfairly prejudiced as a result of sitting in front of the jury for the duration of the trial while bound and gagged with duct tape: "Even after considering the appellant's prior criminal record we find this sentence (99 years in prison) somewhat on the severe end of the spectrum for stealing cartons of cigarettes from a grocery store."

Hat tip: Lowering the Bar.

Reminds me, once again, of one of my favorite Monty Python scenes:

   

What was the date again?

Because the witness' response is funnier than anything I can come up with:

Lawyer: "Now, isn't it true that on the 5th of November last year, you rode naked through the streets on top of a dustcart, letting off fireworks, and singing 'I did it my way' loudly?"

Witness: "What was the date again?"

Yeah, legal research is for losers.

Via the Legal Profession Blog comes this unbelievable exchange set forth in a footnote in this opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. 

Thanks to Edward Wiest for pointing this out to me.

Phipps: . . . so that’s about all I have to say, Your Honor. I don’t have anything other
than that. You know, my client lives in Chicago. ... She continues to earn a living, and she’s generally unavailable if you call her because she, she’s sort of a traveling doctor.

Judge: That’s not much of thing you come in here and tell us, I guess.
Phipps: Well, my attitude is, the [district court] judge got it right . . . . And as far as
whether even Ricks should apply, I don’t think it should.

Judge: What do you do about Morgan?

Phipps: I don’t, I don’t, I don’t know Morgan, Your Honor.

Judge: You don’t know Morgan?

Phipps: Nope.

Judge: You haven’t read it?

Phipps: I try not to read that many cases, your Honor. Ricks is the only one I read. Oh,
Ledbetter, I read Ledbetter, and I read that one that they brought up last night.
I don’t know if that’s not Ledbetter, I can’t remember the name of it. Ricks is the
one that I go by; it’s my North star. Either it applies or it doesn’t apply. I don’t
think it applies.

Judge: I must say, Morgan is a case that is directly relevant to this case. And for you
representing the Plaintiff to get up here—it’s a Supreme Court case—and say
you haven’t read it. Where did they teach you that?

Phipps: They didn’t teach me much, Your Honor.

Judge: At Tulane, is it?

Phipps: Loyola.

Judge: Okay. Well, I must say, that may be an all time first.

Phipps: That’s why I wore a suit today, Your Honor.

Judge: Alright. We’ve got your attitude, anyway.

Person Edward Wiest

Right click for SmartMenu shortcuts

I always find that randomly citing "Roe v. Wade" stops my opponents in their tracks.

I learned it from this guy...here's a court transcript of his arraignment.  It made me laugh, but I feel a bit guilty for doing so. The defendant clearly has issues:

Judge Wilson explains, (this) "was a rather feeble attempt to have a formal arraignment" of a non compos mentis defendant "who twice invoked all the rights and privileges extended to him by Roe v. Wade. " (Hat tip:  Say What?)

Court: Mr. Defendant, I've asked your attorney to go over your indictment with you, and has he done so?

Defendant: Roe v. Wade. I was mugged by Alton Allen. (Long pause.)

Court: Okay. Has -

Defendant: I was onto a check-cashing racket going on at Polk's. So when they figured out I was onto it, they called the law on me. Alton just walked up and hit me in the fact. [sic] They threatened to shoot me with a gun and everything else.

Court(wisely): Okay.

Defendant: And when I lived at the Lufkin Donut Shop - the crack salesman living beside me -

Court: Excuse me. Would you be quiet, please? This is not a time for you to make a statement to the court, okay? This is a time for you to be advised of what you're charged with.

Defendant: I'm really not charged with anything. They just made it up. ... He hit me first and mugged me for 300 bucks.

Court: I understand that. He may very well have done so. And if you're found guilty of that offense ... it carries a range of punishment from two to 10 years in the penitentiary and up to a $10,000 fine.

Defendant: Roe v. Wade.

Court (wisely): Okay.

Defense Attorney: It's a plea of not guilty.

I learned it from this guy...here's a court transcript of his arraignment.  It made me laugh, but I feel a bit guilty for doing so. The defendant clearly has issues:

Judge Wilson explains, (this) "was a rather feeble attempt to have a formal arraignment" of a non compos mentis defendant "who twice invoked all the rights and privileges extended to him by Roe v. Wade. " (Hat tip:  Say What?)

Court: Mr. Defendant, I've asked your attorney to go over your indictment with you, and has he done so?

Defendant: Roe v. Wade. I was mugged by Alton Allen. (Long pause.)

Court: Okay. Has -

Defendant: I was onto a check-cashing racket going on at Polk's. So when they figured out I was onto it, they called the law on me. Alton just walked up and hit me in the fact. [sic] They threatened to shoot me with a gun and everything else.

Court(wisely): Okay.

Defendant: And when I lived at the Lufkin Donut Shop - the crack salesman living beside me -

Court: Excuse me. Would you be quiet, please? This is not a time for you to make a statement to the court, okay? This is a time for you to be advised of what you're charged with.

Defendant: I'm really not charged with anything. They just made it up. ... He hit me first and mugged me for 300 bucks.

Court: I understand that. He may very well have done so. And if you're found guilty of that offense ... it carries a range of punishment from two to 10 years in the penitentiary and up to a $10,000 fine.

Defendant: Roe v. Wade.

Court (wisely): Okay.

Defense Attorney: It's a plea of not guilty.